Suddenly, I like Barney Frank (no, not in a gay way)

[crb]

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/23/more-on-the-frankpaul-marijuan



The marijuana legalization bill announced today by Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), H.R. 2306, would repeal federal penalties for production, distribution, and possession of the drug, leaving the states free to address the issue as they see fit. Under the bill (which Mike Riggs anticipated yesterday), the federal government's role would be limited to preventing importation of marijuana into states that continue to ban it. The Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act of 2011 is consciously modeled after the repeal of the 18th Amendment, which allowed states to establish their own rules governing alcohol. This is the first time such a bill has been introduced.


Write your congressman, tell them to support HR 2306.

[Inspire]

Wow!

[Showal]

Wow!

A new business opportunity?

[Inspire]

I would if Ohio allowed it.

It's less harmful than alcohol IMO.

[AnticorRifling]

Both are more harmful than firearms.

[Showal]

Both are more harmful than firearms.

That's what I say when I finish my biceps curls. I don't know if you heard me, but I did over a thousand.

[Rinualdo]

Ron Paul and Barney Frank. What an unlikely combination.

[Androidpk]

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/23/more-on-the-frankpaul-marijuan



Write your congressman, tell them to support HR 2306.

My congressman teaming up with Ron Paul. Winning. I will be writing a letter to him.

[crb]

Ron Paul and Barney Frank. What an unlikely combination.

I know, two guys with 4 first names between them.

[Cephalopod]

In the 70s, Frank actually wanted to make prostitution legal and create a red-light district adjacent to Boston's financial district. The overt reason for this was to fight some of the issues with illegal drugs and sex in the combat zone, but he's always had a pretty libertarian view on drugs and sex. (This would explain his later living with a male prostitute and admitting to having hired male prostitutes.)

Fun fact: Mitt Romney's father was also in favor of creating the Boston red-light district that Frank proposed.

ETA: I like Barney Frank. He's not my congressman, but I approve of him even though I hate to listen to him talk.

[Parkbandit]

In the 70s, Frank actually wanted to make prostitution legal and create a red-light district adjacent to Boston's financial district. The overt reason for this was to fight some of the issues with illegal drugs and sex in the combat zone, but he's always had a pretty libertarian view on drugs and sex. (This would explain his later living with a male prostitute and admitting to having hired male prostitutes.)


And when the red light district didn't pass the legislature, Barney decided to open up his own gay brothel in his town home.

[TheEschaton]

He was gay in a time when brothels were in. It was the Renaissance of gayness.


I mean this in the gayest way possible.

[Hulkein]

Great bill. /signed, someone who does not have any desire to smoke pot.

Please Congress, pass this fucking bill so we can get on a road to reason in regards to the ridiculous war on drugs.

[DeV]

I still don't like the congressman, but I agree that this bill needs to be passed. We go bat shit crazy spending millions of dollars wasting countless man hours prosecuting people for possessing and smoking small amounts of marijuana. The shit is beyond ridiculous.

[~Rocktar~]

If we pass this, can we bury people who drive under the influence or smoke it around kids under the prisons? See, I could go for legalizing all kinds of shit if we can actually enforce the shit out of driving under the influence and doing it around/providing it to kids laws. And don't think I believe that drunk driving should get a pass either, I think we should do a lot more there too. You have to be a fucking moron to get your 3rd DWI and at that point, you should not be allowed to operate a can opener much less allowed in public.

[pabstblueribbon]

If we pass this, can we bury people who drive under the influence or smoke it around kids under the prisons? See, I could go for legalizing all kinds of shit if we can actually enforce the shit out of driving under the influence and doing it around/providing it to kids laws. And don't think I believe that drunk driving should get a pass either, I think we should do a lot more there too. You have to be a fucking moron to get your 3rd DWI and at that point, you should not be allowed to operate a can opener much less allowed in public.

I don't know about your state laws, but in mine the 3rd DUI is mandatory jail time. You lose your license for several years too. Once you are eligible for a license, it is mandatory that you get a breathalyzer ignition installed on your vehicle.

[Inspire]

I don't know about your state laws, but in mine the 3rd DUI is mandatory jail time. You lose your license for several years too. Once you are eligible for a license, it is mandatory that you get a breathalyzer ignition installed on your vehicle.

Personally, there should be mandatory jail time for the 1st offense.

DUI should be attempted murder, either upon yourself, or everyone else who may be on the road while you're driving drunk.

[~Rocktar~]

I don't know about your state laws, but in mine the 3rd DUI is mandatory jail time. You lose your license for several years too. Once you are eligible for a license, it is mandatory that you get a breathalyzer ignition installed on your vehicle.

I don't mean jail time, I mean serious prison sentence at real prison doing labor or public service mandatory. And losing your license doesn't mean shit to most people, real prison time doing work might. Especially all the uppity socialite types that think it's ok to have a couple glasses of wine and so on, under the influence is impaired driving no matter if it is 30 yr old scotch, 100 yr old wine or 3 hour old ripple.

[WRoss]

I think you all have flawed thinking. You are expecting people to make a rational decision while in a irrational frame of mind. Statistics have shown that increasing penalties for DUI's does not decrease the number of drunk drivers on the road. I'm sure that the statistics aren't flawless, but there are much better ways to approach problems than throwing away someone. By that logic, we would only burden society further by having to provide for people with DUI's instead of providing a system in which they can become a productive member of society.

[Androidpk]

So because they made a rational decision that then made them irrational they shouldn't have to suffer the consequences?

[WRoss]

I'm not saying that at all. I am saying that making your 1st DUI a prison offense or an attempted man slaughter is not a solution.

[pabstblueribbon]

I don't mean jail time, I mean serious prison sentence at real prison doing labor or public service mandatory. And losing your license doesn't mean shit to most people, real prison time doing work might. Especially all the uppity socialite types that think it's ok to have a couple glasses of wine and so on, under the influence is impaired driving no matter if it is 30 yr old scotch, 100 yr old wine or 3 hour old ripple.

There are plenty of fatal crashes due to retarded drivers. They should do jail time for driving while impaired.

Not only is there mandatory jail time, there are various levels of substance abuse traffic offender programs that are very expensive. In my state, you pay for it out of your own pocket. Losing your license may not be a problem for anyone in a big city with decent public transportation, but its a very big deal for anyone in lets say, Kansas City. It makes it almost impossible to work.

While I do believe there should be serious consequences, and there are, I agree with Rogane that we shouldn't just lock them up and throw away the key.

They need counseling, they need to stop drinking, and they need to be empowered to contribute SOMETHING to society instead of removing their ability to work and getting 3 hots and a cot on my dime.

[Inspire]

I think you all have flawed thinking. You are expecting people to make a rational decision while in a irrational frame of mind. Statistics have shown that increasing penalties for DUI's does not decrease the number of drunk drivers on the road. I'm sure that the statistics aren't flawless, but there are much better ways to approach problems than throwing away someone. By that logic, we would only burden society further by having to provide for people with DUI's instead of providing a system in which they can become a productive member of society.


They should change the law so that when you have to show your license to buy the alcohol, if you have a DUI they decline to sell you the alcohol.

[WRoss]

They should change the law so that when you have to show your license to buy the alcohol, if you have a DUI they decline to sell you the alcohol.

I think that BAID devices are the way to go. A few car companies wanted to install them in ALL cars in the next 5 years, but I think that they backed out of it.

While we are on topic, I think that when you make a transaction, you should have to list, upfront, all your shady ass dealings.

[~Rocktar~]

I think you all have flawed thinking. You are expecting people to make a rational decision while in a irrational frame of mind. Statistics have shown that increasing penalties for DUI's does not decrease the number of drunk drivers on the road. I'm sure that the statistics aren't flawless, but there are much better ways to approach problems than throwing away someone. By that logic, we would only burden society further by having to provide for people with DUI's instead of providing a system in which they can become a productive member of society.

Did I say I was only for increased penalties? I want better enforcement, most now days get shit and move on. And if we are so damn concerned about making them productive members of society when they break the law, what about all the deadbeat screw offs that don't break the law that we support? I am for reducing the levels of accident and injury from impaired driving, period. When people drive impaired, they put me and you at risk. I am fine if they drink themselves into a coma, it's when you harm kids or put me at risk that is unacceptable.

Of course, this would be an issue with pot, you can walk into a bar and not get drunk, if you are around enough people smoking, you will get some effects. Again, not good and not ok with me.

[pabstblueribbon]

Did I say I was only for increased penalties? I want better enforcement, most now days get shit and move on. And if we are so damn concerned about making them productive members of society when they break the law, what about all the deadbeat screw offs that don't break the law that we support? I am for reducing the levels of accident and injury from impaired driving, period. When people drive impaired, they put me and you at risk. I am fine if they drink themselves into a coma, it's when you harm kids or put me at risk that is unacceptable.

Of course, this would be an issue with pot, you can walk into a bar and not get drunk, if you are around enough people smoking, you will get some effects. Again, not good and not ok with me.

Myth. It is very hard to even show up positive for THC due to second hand smoke, unless you are purposely trying to do so.

[Parkbandit]

They should change the law so that when you have to show your license to buy the alcohol, if you have a DUI they decline to sell you the alcohol.

That would be a good idea... for people 21-25 years of age. After that, you aren't generally carded.

[pabstblueribbon]

They should change the law so that when you have to show your license to buy the alcohol, if you have a DUI they decline to sell you the alcohol.

Yeah, they should totally make a law that states that you have to show ID when asked to buy alcohol.

Good thinking.

[Warriorbird]

I think losing your damn license immediately upon acquiring a DUI would be the best punishment.

-spoken as somebody who profits from the sale of alcohol, mind you

[~Rocktar~]

Myth. It is very hard to even show up positive for THC due to second hand smoke, unless you are purposely trying to do so.

Myth, if you are around smoke, you inhale it, there is no such thing as not inhaling it. Testing positive and having effects are not the same thing. I can assure you I can sit at a table full of drunks for weeks at a time and never have any effects from alcohol and never test positive for it no matter how much they drink. Next retarded argument?

[Ashlander]

I think losing your damn license immediately upon acquiring a DUI would be the best punishment.

-spoken as somebody who profits from the sale of alcohol, mind you

As much as I'd love to see it happen I don't think it'd stop many of them from driving anyway.

[pabstblueribbon]

Myth, if you are around smoke, you inhale it, there is no such thing as not inhaling it. Testing positive and having effects are not the same thing. I can assure you I can sit at a table full of drunks for weeks at a time and never have any effects from alcohol and never test positive for it no matter how much they drink. Next retarded argument?

I've heard it straight from a doctors mouth that although possible, it is highly unlikely that second hand smoke will lead to a positive result for THC on a drug screen.

It goes without saying, that the entire reason for why tetra hydra cannibanol is classified as a 'drug' is that your body metabolizes it which leads to 'impairment'. If you've metabolized it, guess what, you'll come up positive on a drug screen (obviously many factors will affect the results).


I can assure you I can sit at a table full of drunks for weeks at a time and never have any effects from alcohol and never test positive for it no matter how much they drink.
Completely unrelated commentary that means absolutely jack shit in regards to the volume of smoke you would need to produce in order to pollute the volume of air that you breathe to achieve measurable intoxication.


"derp derp, i am right because water is wet and thats true, so this somehow validates my completely unrelated point"
I'm more worried about sexual deviants, personally.

[~Rocktar~]

Yep, the ill effects are absolutely zero, we can tell because you are a prime example. Keep it up dumbass, it just makes you look even stupider if that possible. If second hand smoke was of no concern, then why all the anti-smoking laws? Guess what, the amount of nicotine and carcinogens you get from second hand smoke is very very small as well but it is clearly measurable and has a decided effect on the body in such small quantities. Again, a completely retarded and erroneous argument.

Stop being a dumbass.


I'm more worried about sexual deviants, personally.

Worried someone might make a pass at you?

[pabstblueribbon]

Yep, the ill effects are absolutely zero, we can tell because you are a prime example. Keep it up dumbass, it just makes you look even stupider if that possible. If second hand smoke was of no concern, then why all the anti-smoking laws? Guess what, the amount of nicotine and carcinogens you get from second hand smoke is very very small as well but it is clearly measurable and has a decided effect on the body in such small quantities. Again, a completely retarded and erroneous argument.

Stop being a dumbass.



Worried someone might make a pass at you?

Ill effects and intoxication are not the same thing.

Second hand smoke from cigarettes are more concerned with the toxic chemicals released which increase likely hood of cancer and heart disease, not absorption of nicotine.

http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/effects-of-secondhand-smoke

If nicotine is so addictive, then why are there no studies surrounding addiction to second hand smoke?

Your reasoning is flawed.


Worried someone might make a pass at you?

No, I'm calling you a sexual deviant, which you are.

[~Rocktar~]

Again, you miss the simple in the vain effort to support your typically retarded argument. And then you go about the distraction of personal attacks.

At least WB can be witty, you are just sad.

[pabstblueribbon]

Again, you miss the simple in the vain effort to support your typically retarded argument.And then you go about the distraction of personal attacks.

At least WB can be witty, you are just sad.

Nice way out. You lose. Come back with scientific evidence next time instead of your typical regurgitated rhetoric.


Again, you miss the simple in the vain effort to support your typically retarded argument. And then you go about the distraction of personal attacks.

At least WB can be witty, you are just sad.


Yep, the ill effects are absolutely zero, we can tell because you are a prime example. Keep it up dumbass, it just makes you look even stupider if that possible. If second hand smoke was of no concern, then why all the anti-smoking laws? Guess what, the amount of nicotine and carcinogens you get from second hand smoke is very very small as well but it is clearly measurable and has a decided effect on the body in such small quantities. Again, a completely retarded and erroneous argument.

Stop being a dumbass.



Worried someone might make a pass at you?

Ironic.

[~Rocktar~]

Nice way out. You lose. Come back with scientific evidence next time instead of your typical regurgitated rhetoric.

You do realize that you are arguing in favor of being able to smoke pot around kids who have smaller bodies and thus much lower resistance to the effects of even small amounts of chemical intoxicants and so on right? Show me some scientific evidence that says it can't ever happen. Right, you can't because we know it can and has.



Ironic.

Fight fire with fire. You are still sad.

[pabstblueribbon]

You do realize that you are arguing in favor of being able to smoke pot around kids who have smaller bodies and thus much lower resistance to the effects of even small amounts of chemical intoxicants and so on right? Show me some scientific evidence that says it can't ever happen. Right, you can't because we know it can and has.




Fight fire with fire. You are still sad.

First of all, you resorted to name calling first. It's your usual modus operandi and you attempting to try to take the high ground is quite laughable.

I'm not arguing anything of the sort. How you made that leap is.. well.. beyond me..

At no time were children mentioned.


Of course, this would be an issue with pot, you can walk into a bar and not get drunk, if you are around enough people smoking, you will get some effects. Again, not good and not ok with me.

This is the original quote I was responding too, bolded, as it was originally. Try again Rocktard.

[Androidpk]

Nice way out. You lose. Come back with scientific evidence next time instead of your typical regurgitated rhetoric.





Ironic.

He has a history of talking shit to people then crying when people do the same to him.

[Tgo01]

Even if they decriminalized smoking marijuana would that suddenly mean people will be allowed to smoke it on the streets and inside of bars and the like? I honestly don't know, how are the laws in California and other states in regards to medical marijuana? Are they free to smoke it where ever they like or just inside of their homes?

Tobacco is almost to the point where people can only smoke it on their own property in a lot of places.

[pabstblueribbon]

Even if they decriminalized smoking marijuana would that suddenly mean people will be allowed to smoke it on the streets and inside of bars and the like? I honestly don't know, how are the laws in California and other states in regards to medical marijuana? Are they free to smoke it where ever they like or just inside of their homes?

Tobacco is almost to the point where people can only smoke it on their own property in a lot of places.

Get right on out of town with that rational thinking.

REEFER MADNESS RUUUNNNNN

[~Rocktar~]

I'm not arguing anything of the sort. How you made that leap is.. well.. beyond me..

At no time were children mentioned.


Did I say I was only for increased penalties? I want better enforcement, most now days get shit and move on. And if we are so damn concerned about making them productive members of society when they break the law, what about all the deadbeat screw offs that don't break the law that we support? I am for reducing the levels of accident and injury from impaired driving, period. When people drive impaired, they put me and you at risk. I am fine if they drink themselves into a coma, it's when you harm kids or put me at risk that is unacceptable.

Of course, this would be an issue with pot, you can walk into a bar and not get drunk, if you are around enough people smoking, you will get some effects. Again, not good and not ok with me.


The full original post, stop cherry picking dumbass.

The issue becomes that you put your head up your ass, pick one thing you think you are right on, and ride that dead horse into the basement. All along, you attempt to distract from your piss poor argument with insults. I take no high ground about insults, I simply point out that you have no valid argument and your insults aren't an effective argument, simply a distraction. I insult you simply because they fit as accurate descriptions of your puerile and inane behavior. You have a long history of presenting something idiotic, yelling about it for days even though it is clearly shown to be a steaming pile of shit and like now, trying to distract and skulk away. Remember the reactor fiasco?

At no time have I said you would get stoned off your ass on second hand pot smoke, I said you will have some effects and that is simply true. I also said that it is my opinion that having those effects and having kids around such is not ok, which is also true since it is my opinion. So, you have spent a lot of time to try and argue that the factual evidence is in fact wrong, that it can't happen, and it can.

Again, a dumbass argument from a dumbass because said dumbass can't manage to read and understand plain English.

[~Rocktar~]

He has a history of talking shit to people then crying when people do the same to him.

Not particularly.

You do have a history of adding little or nothing to any thread you post in. Way to keep your record intact.

[Tgo01]

I am for reducing the levels of accident and injury from impaired driving, period. When people drive impaired, they put me and you at risk. I am fine if they drink themselves into a coma, it's when you harm kids or put me at risk that is unacceptable.

I guess I'm a dumbass who can't read and understand English also because I took that part of your post to mean you are worried about impaired driving because it harms others (well just you and kids), not the potentially harmful effects of second hand marijuana smoke. I mean you even go so far as to place the setting at a bar, I can't remember the last time I saw a child in a bar.

[Androidpk]

Not particularly.

You do have a history of adding little or nothing to any thread you post in. Way to keep your record intact.

Oh, I guess we have something in common then.

[pabstblueribbon]

The full original post, stop cherry picking dumbass.

The issue becomes that you put your head up your ass, pick one thing you think you are right on, and ride that dead horse into the basement. All along, you attempt to distract from your piss poor argument with insults. I take no high ground about insults, I simply point out that you have no valid argument and your insults aren't an effective argument, simply a distraction. I insult you simply because they fit as accurate descriptions of your puerile and inane behavior. You have a long history of presenting something idiotic, yelling about it for days even though it is clearly shown to be a steaming pile of shit and like now, trying to distract and skulk away. Remember the reactor fiasco?

At no time have I said you would get stoned off your ass on second hand pot smoke, I said you will have some effects and that is simply true. I also said that it is my opinion that having those effects and having kids around such is not ok, which is also true since it is my opinion. So, you have spent a lot of time to try and argue that the factual evidence is in fact wrong, that it can't happen, and it can.

Again, a dumbass argument from a dumbass because said dumbass can't manage to read and understand plain English.

I wasn't arguing what you do or don't have a problem with. I was arguing with the fact that you think second hand smoke is likely to cause intoxication and thus, put people on the road in danger.

Pretty sure I proved my point while you squirmed around the issue and acted like a big baby.

As far as the molten salt reactor discussion, you can re-read the thread.

I cited evidence and historical fact, which no one else seemed to be able to. I'm not saying I know all the information about it, and I'm sure there are big chunks of missing information, because its likely classified.

I'm sure there were likely challenges to overcome as with any major scientific undertaking that were not resolved with the first experiment.

There is no doubt though, that funding and subsequently research into this non proliferating technology was pulled due to other designs having already been heavily invested in and being able to produce weapons grade materials during the start of the cold war.

Who's distracting who now?

[Thickbeard]

Oh my god, somebody please think of the children! Imagine them seeing all those people sitting around and eating doritos while listening to Pink Floyd, oh the humanity! Not Pink Floyd, Jesus Christ!

Think about all those poor pushers who will not be able to support their 23 children and put spinning rims on their car, what will they do? Get a job? What about all the poor drug mules who sneak across our border in order to satiate our hunger for marijuana, what will they do? Stay in Mexico?

Someone may not be able to control their use of this substance and may get into a car and endanger the children so it is up to us to collectively attempt to control the behavior of other adults. Trusting most people to act like mature adults with a mild drug is intolerable.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I think this comic I made detailing the horrors of marijuana legalization explains it all.

http://i.imgur.com/P0Izr.jpg

[~Rocktar~]

I wasn't arguing what you do or don't have a problem with. I was arguing with the fact that you think second hand smoke is likely to cause intoxication and thus, put people on the road in danger.

I did not argue the likely hood, I argued the possibility and the fact is that is is possible. I cited two instances where I have issue and that I hope that such things, use around kids and driving impaired, would be seriously and realistically punished as opposed to our current weak enforcement of drunk driving laws. You are the one that came in raving how it takes too much and is impossible and in general spewing a bunch of shit that is not factually true to support your inane commentary.

I pointed out that it was possible, despite how likely and that your declarations of impossibility were and are simply wrong.

You got asshurt and tried to use insults to distract from your fail argument.

End of story.



As far as the molten salt reactor discussion, you can re-read the thread.

Why, it's the same pattern, you declare some half backed "fact" and go off on a tangent all the while ignoring any dissent, factual refutation to your claim and then you try distractions to claim a victory. Big deal.



There is no doubt though, that funding and subsequently research into this non proliferating technology was pulled due to other designs having already been heavily invested in and being able to produce weapons grade materials during the start of the cold war.

According to who? Oh, that's right, you. I am 100% sure that the fact that we already have reactors that were designed, developed, proven effective and reasonably safe has nothing to do with it. Yeah, again, facts fly in your face and you can't stand it.


And just so we don't lose too much focus here, keep in mind, I would be fine with legalizing pot, if that happens, I will grow the living shit out of the stuff. I will make enough money to buy a NewHolland mower/conditioner (http://agriculture.newholland.com/us/en/Products/Hay-and-Forage-Equipment/H7150-Haybine-Mower-Conditioner/Pages/products_overview.aspx) to cut and prep the crop and bale the shit in 1 ton bales with a NewHolland Baler. (http://agriculture.newholland.com/us/en/Products/Hay-and-Forage-Equipment/Roll-Belt-Round-Balers/Pages/Products_Overview.aspx)

[pabstblueribbon]

I did not argue the likely hood, I argued the possibility and the fact is that is is possible. I cited two instances where I have issue and that I hope that such things, use around kids and driving impaired, would be seriously and realistically punished as opposed to our current weak enforcement of drunk driving laws. You are the one that came in raving how it takes too much and is impossible and in general spewing a bunch of shit that is not factually true to support your inane commentary.

I pointed out that it was possible, despite how likely and that your declarations of impossibility were and are simply wrong.

You got asshurt and tried to use insults to distract from your fail argument.

End of story.




Why, it's the same pattern, you declare some half backed "fact" and go off on a tangent all the while ignoring any dissent, factual refutation to your claim and then you try distractions to claim a victory. Big deal.




According to who? Oh, that's right, you. I am 100% sure that the fact that we already have reactors that were designed, developed, proven effective and reasonably safe has nothing to do with it. Yeah, again, facts fly in your face and you can't stand it.


And just so we don't lose too much focus here, keep in mind, I would be fine with legalizing pot, if that happens, I will grow the living shit out of the stuff. I will make enough money to buy a NewHolland mower/conditioner (http://agriculture.newholland.com/us/en/Products/Hay-and-Forage-Equipment/H7150-Haybine-Mower-Conditioner/Pages/products_overview.aspx) to cut and prep the crop and bale the shit in 1 ton bales with a NewHolland Baler. (http://agriculture.newholland.com/us/en/Products/Hay-and-Forage-Equipment/Roll-Belt-Round-Balers/Pages/Products_Overview.aspx)

Jesus.. you're a fucking idiot. You do know what the difference between an LWR and an MSR are right?

It's not according to me. Its according to years of research at ORNL and the like. LWR's, which are what the majority of our aging reactors are based on, are inherently dangerous that there is high pressure steam / water in the core. MSR's cores are not and are incapable of a steam explosion.

You might want to look up the difference between passive, and active safety while you're at it.

Your complete lack of understanding is once again apparent.

[Tea & Strumpets]

Even if they decriminalized smoking marijuana would that suddenly mean people will be allowed to smoke it on the streets and inside of bars and the like? I honestly don't know, how are the laws in California and other states in regards to medical marijuana? Are they free to smoke it where ever they like or just inside of their homes?

Tobacco is almost to the point where people can only smoke it on their own property in a lot of places.

My limited reading comprehension led me to believe this bill would no longer make it illegal under federal law, and allowing each state to handle it as they see fit.

[pabstblueribbon]

He's a pundit. He knows about everything.

Gah.. he's totally derailed me. Fucking hate people spreading FUD about nuclear energy.

FYI, Rocktard, you might be surprised that some of the the newest reactor designs, Gen IV's, are pursuing this tech. They are however, not scheduled to come online until 2025, and probably later due to budget slashing, once again.

[Androidpk]

My limited reading comprehension led me to believe this bill would no longer make it illegal under federal law, and allowing each state to handle it as they see fit.

Exactly.

[pabstblueribbon]

My limited reading comprehension led me to believe this bill would no longer make it illegal under federal law, and allowing each state to handle it as they see fit.

States rights!

If you don't like it Rocktar, move to Dumbville, Jackassonia, USA and take it up your inane rediculous argument with the local government.

They would probably make you Mayor.

[Tgo01]

My limited reading comprehension led me to believe this bill would no longer make it illegal under federal law, and allowing each state to handle it as they see fit.

Right, and a few states already have laws in regards to medical marijuana. So how are the laws in those states when it comes to medical marijuana? Light up wherever you please or are there restrictions to where you can smoke your medication?

[Androidpk]

They would probably make you Mayor.

A scary thought. But realistic.

[TheEschaton]

I lived in Colorado for awhile, I'm pretty sure you couldn't smoke, even if you possessed legally, in public. Not even at the shop you bought it at.

You couldn't operate a MV while impaired, though the guidelines of what being "impaired" was while under the effects of marijuana were much looser than the precision of a BAC test.

In other words, the same rules as alcohol in re: public consumption, except that it's not served publically.

[~Rocktar~]

Jesus.. you're a fucking idiot. You do know what the difference between an LWR and an MSR are right?

It's not according to me. Its according to years of research at ORNL and the like. LWR's, which are what the majority of our aging reactors are based on, are inherently dangerous that there is high pressure steam / water in the core. MSR's cores are not and are incapable of a steam explosion.

You might want to look up the difference between passive, and active safety while you're at it.

Your complete lack of understanding is once again apparent.

You are a fucking idiot and again miss the point.

Steam explosions are not the largest concern from most of our reactors, hydrogen explosions are. Since liquefied hydrogen has a lower viscosity than water giving it a lower incidence of cavitation from impeller blades, as well as being almost impossible to make radioactive from exposure to high levels of gamma and neutron radiation, it is better to use for moving heat quickly out of a reactor core and maintaining a smooth heat transfer. Then it is passed through a secondary heat transfer unit to move the heat into the water/steam system for power generation. Now, if you get a hydrogen leak, it will ignite in the presence of air and bingo, you have a fire or explosion and that is bad. At least that is what the TVA nuclear engineer I used to hang out with discussed. It could be me, but since he has actually been in the plants and is responsible for one in operation, I am pretty sure that he has more of a clue than you.

Now, the issue with molten salt reactors along with other molten metal models is and has always been the maintenance of the molten state and the safe transference of heat without dropping below the molten threshold. Since, if you don't keep the metal hot enough, it solidifies, you can end up with a large, radioactive lump and billions of destroyed machinery suitable only for recycling. The Russians tried this in a production unit in one of their submarines but they were never able to control the heat transfer well enough to not turn the pumping systems into slag. By the way, once your molten salt bed does solidify, there is not a very suitable way to re-use it without dissembling the whole unit and basically taking a jackhammer to the salt block.

Now, on to the real life concerns, simply put, you need exotic materials, you end up with hydrofluoric acid as a gas byproduct when hot and when cold, the salts produce fluorine gas. Both of which are excessively corrosive and fatal to humans in small quantities. The side effect being you have to replace the core on a very short schedule and many of the components will not have substantial lifespans so the operating costs will be very high and the maintenance needs very high as well compared to current models. Last but not least is the fact that it can take years to get enough fuel to get one started and we might be able to get a handful up and going with current stocks of material. We would also have to have a reprocessing facility built next to one and no one in the US does this because of legal and regulatory considerations.

Is the potential there to improve all these considerations, yes, is the whole "non-weaponization" argument the basis of not adopting them, not even 50%. The primary killer of nuclear power in any form has been and continues to be stupid people and the news media driving inane and constantly changing Federal regulations and amazing amounts of legal bullshit.

Now, please, shut the fuck up dumbass.

By the way fucknugget, other than the situations I outlined, where did you read that I didn't like it? Gods above please go to an elementary school and get some reading comprehension for a change.

[pabstblueribbon]

You are a fucking idiot and again miss the point.

Steam explosions are not the largest concern from most of our reactors, hydrogen explosions are. Since liquefied hydrogen has a lower viscosity than water giving it a lower incidence of cavitation from impeller blades, as well as being almost impossible to make radioactive from exposure to high levels of gamma and neutron radiation, it is better to use for moving heat quickly out of a reactor core and maintaining a smooth heat transfer. Then it is passed through a secondary heat transfer unit to move the heat into the water/steam system for power generation. Now, if you get a hydrogen leak, it will ignite in the presence of air and bingo, you have a fire or explosion and that is bad. At least that is what the TVA nuclear engineer I used to hang out with discussed. It could be me, but since he has actually been in the plants and is responsible for one in operation, I am pretty sure that he has more of a clue than you.

Now, the issue with molten salt reactors along with other molten metal models is and has always been the maintenance of the molten state and the safe transference of heat without dropping below the molten threshold. Since, if you don't keep the metal hot enough, it solidifies, you can end up with a large, radioactive lump and billions of destroyed machinery suitable only for recycling. The Russians tried this in a production unit in one of their submarines but they were never able to control the heat transfer well enough to not turn the pumping systems into slag. By the way, once your molten salt bed does solidify, there is not a very suitable way to re-use it without dissembling the whole unit and basically taking a jackhammer to the salt block.

Now, on to the real life concerns, simply put, you need exotic materials, you end up with hydrofluoric acid as a gas byproduct when hot and when cold, the salts produce fluorine gas. Both of which are excessively corrosive and fatal to humans in small quantities. The side effect being you have to replace the core on a very short schedule and many of the components will not have substantial lifespans so the operating costs will be very high and the maintenance needs very high as well compared to current models. Last but not least is the fact that it can take years to get enough fuel to get one started and we might be able to get a handful up and going with current stocks of material. We would also have to have a reprocessing facility built next to one and no one in the US does this because of legal and regulatory considerations.

Is the potential there to improve all these considerations, yes, is the whole "non-weaponization" argument the basis of not adopting them, not even 50%. The primary killer of nuclear power in any form has been and continues to be stupid people and the news media driving inane and constantly changing Federal regulations and amazing amounts of legal bullshit.

Now, please, shut the fuck up dumbass.

By the way fucknugget, other than the situations I outlined, where did you read that I didn't like it? Gods above please go to an elementary school and get some reading comprehension for a change.
Well, you took the time to read something. I'm proud of you. Nice about face.

Your assumptions are quite misguided. Reactor designs vary greately. Even in MSR's. Depending on the fuel, they can breed fissile material, or be non-proliferating. Our tech was vastly different from the Soviets and the entire POINT was to solidify. If there is an incident the 'idea' was to drop the fuel, IE salt/fuel mixture, into lead vats, solidify, and thus halt the reaction.

In response to the bolded section. Yes, this was/has been the problem for new nuclear plants being built in the private sector for power generation in the last few decades.

It however, is not a huge obstacle for the DOE, ORNL or any other testing facilty. Do you know when the last nuclear bomb was set off at N2S2? Do you know when the MSRE's funding was drastically reduced in lieu of LWR's?

[Tgo01]

Are kids running around salt reactors that we have to look out for now?

[pabstblueribbon]

LOL

Ugh. True. /derailed

[~Rocktar~]

Well, you took the time to read something. I'm proud of you. Nice about face.

Your assumptions are quite misguided. Reactor designs vary greately. Even in MSR's. Depending on the fuel, they can breed fissile material, or be non-proliferating. Our tech was vastly different from the Soviets and the entire POINT was to solidify. If there is an incident the 'idea' was to drop the fuel, IE salt/fuel mixture, into lead vats, solidify, and thus halt the reaction.

In response to the bolded section. Yes, this was/has been the problem for new nuclear plants being built in the private sector for power generation in the last few decades.

It however, is not a huge obstacle for the DOE, ORNL or any other testing facilty. Do you know when the last nuclear bomb was set off at N2S2? Do you know when the MSRE's funding was drastically reduced in lieu of LWR's?

Yet again, change the argument when shown you are wrong. You are almost as good as WB.

And yes, the point in an accident is for it to solidify, the problem is, having enough control to prevent that when there is NOT an accident. And that is the real rub.

[pabstblueribbon]

Yet again, change the argument when shown you are wrong. You are almost as good as WB.

And yes, the point in an accident is for it to solidify, the problem is, having enough control to prevent that when there is NOT an accident. And that is the real rub.

You're completely wrong. The experiment was successful on all accounts. It achieved every single goal. Ran stable for 5 years.

http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/NAT_MSREexperience.pdf
http://moltensalt.net/references/static/downloads/pdf/ORNL-TM-0202.pdf
http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/ORNL-3708.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

The biggest issue they had was the cracking that developed in the alloys they were using to create parts that could withstand the flourine gas. Changing the metallurgy of the alloy could have prevented that, which they knew niobium would solve. Project ended. LWR's continued.

I'm going to skip the whole massive cleanup debate that occurred in the mid 90's because my father once said, when you argue with a retard, it only makes you look retarded.

I would call your friend in the industry a little confused, if he existed.

[Warriorbird]

Are kids running around salt reactors that we have to look out for now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBr1ebmBjME

Stan will get it.

[Stanley Burrell]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBr1ebmBjME

Stan will get it.

You turned back time and that's just what you did.

[~Rocktar~]

You're completely wrong. The experiment was successful on all accounts. It achieved every single goal. Ran stable for 5 years.

http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/NAT_MSREexperience.pdf
http://moltensalt.net/references/static/downloads/pdf/ORNL-TM-0202.pdf
http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/ORNL-3708.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

The biggest issue they had was the cracking that developed in the alloys they were using to create parts that could withstand the flourine gas. Changing the metallurgy of the alloy could have prevented that, which they knew niobium would solve. Project ended. LWR's continued.

Oooo, one experiment makes an entire industry change over night. Yeah, right. In addition, until you have something running a long time under a lot of different conditions, you don't get to say "problem solved". Seriously dude, there are many very important and pretty costly issues with making this setup work along with all the support processes needed that simply don't exist today. Much like Hydrogen fueled vehicles, it sounds good until you understand the trillions of dollars of non-existent infrastructure needed along with the fundamental technical hurdles remaining.


I'm going to skip the whole massive cleanup debate that occurred in the mid 90's because my father once said, when you argue with a retard, it only makes you look retarded.

Might have something to do with why he didn't argue with you much.


I would call your friend in the industry a little confused, if he existed.

About what exactly since his contribution is only a small tidbit at the beginning? You really do need to get a clue and some reading comprehension.

Again, poor argument followed by a side distraction and then when you fail, insults as distractions.

[BriarFox]

Oooo, one experiment makes an entire industry change over night. Yeah, right. In addition, until you have something running a long time under a lot of different conditions, you don't get to say "problem solved". Seriously dude, there are many very important and pretty costly issues with making this setup work along with all the support processes needed that simply don't exist today. Much like Hydrogen fueled vehicles, it sounds good until you understand the trillions of dollars of non-existent infrastructure needed along with the fundamental technical hurdles remaining.



Might have something to do with why he didn't argue with you much.



About what exactly since his contribution is only a small tidbit at the beginning? You really do need to get a clue and some reading comprehension.

Again, poor argument followed by a side distraction and then when you fail, insults as distractions.

I didn't think you had enough red bars, so I gave you some more.

[pabstblueribbon]

Oooo, one experiment makes an entire industry change over night. Yeah, right. In addition, until you have something running a long time under a lot of different conditions, you don't get to say "problem solved". Seriously dude, there are many very important and pretty costly issues with making this setup work along with all the support processes needed that simply don't exist today. Much like Hydrogen fueled vehicles, it sounds good until you understand the trillions of dollars of non-existent infrastructure needed along with the fundamental technical hurdles remaining.

No, there were TONS of experiments conducted with this one endeavor.. tons.

This is getting really tiring...but... the MSRE is the ONLY reactor design TO THIS DAY that can run all three fuels. Nuclear waste, uranium, and thorium. Says a little something, doesn't it? On 1960's tech!

It was designed with passive cooling. When reactor temps rose above the melting point of the 'freeze plug' the freeze plug would melt, and all the liquid salt would drain into sub-critical storage vats. The molten salt served two purposes: Coolant, and it held the nuclear material. Lack of coolant in a traditional design is catastrophic. In this design, it is not, since the reactive fuel is mixed with the coolant and a loss of the coolant means you lose the fuel, which halts the reaction. There's a lot more too it that makes the entire far safer as well, but I won't get into it.



Might have something to do with why he didn't argue with you much.
You can do better.


About what exactly since his contribution is only a small tidbit at the beginning? You really do need to get a clue and some reading comprehension.
You're the one who stated that he 'worked in the industry' and knew more than I did.

The problem is that your talking points were well, completely off topic.

The challenges your 'friend' listed were mainly concerning LMFR's and SFR's. Completely different designs than the MSRE. Secondly, any hydrogen concerns are easily solved with the use of catalytic hydrogen recombiners.

http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/29/030/29030457.pdf

No more hydrogen explosions!

EDIT: More reading for you. Notice the last bit about non-proliferation.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf77.html

[Cephalopod]

No more hydrogen explosions!

Jesus! You want to blow us all to shit, Sherlock?

http://www.archeradvice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/archer3.jpg

[~Rocktar~]

I would call your friend in the industry a little confused, if he existed.

And you would be incorrect on many counts. The challenges presented were not from my friend and I did not suggest they were, please go to elementary school again and brush up on reading comprehension. He simply discussed the use and benefits of hydrogen filled primary cooling loops. The article you presented has absolutely nothing to do with core cooling loops used in current reactors.

You a zealot for this idea when the clear and direct obstacles to it's implementation have been laid out by the people you even recommend as supporting it and you still refuse to understand why it is not implemented. Yet again proving that when shown your errors you continue with some form of distraction. You aren't worth the electrons to debate this anymore. When it becomes economically useful to overcome the materials, handling, control and reprocessing/waste handling issues, then it will be implemented, until then, it is like hydrogen cars, a nice idea needing trillions in infrastructure that doesn't exist to support.


I didn't think . . .

You are right, you don't think, you simply troll and do it poorly. Keep on trolling dumbass.

[Tsa`ah]

How in fuck did this thread turn from two polar opposites proposing federal decriminalization of pot to MSRs?

[Rinualdo]

How in fuck did this thread turn from two polar opposites proposing federal decriminalization of pot to MSRs?

Rocktar happened.

[~Rocktar~]

Rocktar happened.

Pbr happened, get it right buttnugget.

[BriarFox]

You are right, you don't think, you simply troll and do it poorly. Keep on trolling dumbass.

Aww, did I hurt your feelings, Rocktar? It's too bad you can't have the same sort of stoicism as the Founding Fathers. Do you cry yourself to sleep at night praying that God grants you the strength to overcome the liberal, gotcha media?

[Tsa`ah]

Pbr happened, get it right buttnugget.

How in the hell did you come to that conclusion ... looking back it was you that brought up a previous conversation (one that you were likely spanked pretty badly in) that caused further derailing of the current thread.

Post 42, made by you, makes the first mention of any reactor in this thread. I'm guessing it wasn't a pot reactor ... which would have been somewhat relevant.

[Cephalopod]

A pot reactor sounds pretty awesome, to be honest. Someone make one.

[Showal]

A pot reactor sounds pretty awesome, to be honest. Someone make one.

Seconded. Only through the decriminalization of marijuana can we solve our global energy crisis.

[Tgo01]

Drinking game! Every time Rocktar lashes out at someone for calling him out on his bullshit you have to take a drink.

[CrystalTears]

Dude, we'd be drunk 24/7.

[Showal]

Drinking game! Every time Rocktar lashes out at someone for calling him out on his bullshit you have to take a drink.

How about every time he says not to resort to personal insults and then gives a bunch of personal insults you have to drink?

Every time he forgets his login password you have to drink? And then you have to drink for every additional squiggle he adds to his new name?

[Cephalopod]

Take two shots anytime he quotes a post and condenses its contents to "I didn't think" or "I don't think", then responds "You're right" OR condenses the contents to "I think" and responds "Stop lying."

...alcohol poisoning in 3, 2, 1...

[~Rocktar~]

Aww, did I hurt your feelings, Rocktar? It's too bad you can't have the same sort of stoicism as the Founding Fathers. Do you cry yourself to sleep at night praying that God grants you the strength to overcome the liberal, gotcha media?

Too bad you can't have the sense or involvement that our Founding Fathers had. I sleep just fine and despite many posts confirming my stance that apparently you have missed in your lazy drive by trolling, I am not Christian and I don't pray to some God for strength to overcome the stupid in the world. I know that all things come to those who wait and all people get what is comming to them. In time, you and others will see the results of the damage that Liberal mush headed thinking does and regret it. Until then, suffer in your little world of needing the approval of the pack that drives you to troll with such miserable lack of skill.

I will continue to point out that your drive by trolling contributes nothing other than post count.

[~Rocktar~]

Take two shots anytime he quotes a post and condenses its contents to "I didn't think" or "I don't think", then responds "You're right" OR condenses the contents to "I think" and responds "Stop lying."

...alcohol poisoning in 3, 2, 1...

Take 1 shot anytime Nachos, Briar Fox, or the others drive by a thread to simply add to their post count.

Take one more shot any time any of the Mush head crew fail miserably at reading comprehension and make assumptions based on their own motives despite clear language to the contrary.

[Latrinsorm]

Hey guys, didn't read thread, just driving(?) by to say hi to the pack.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2009/11/three-wolf-moon-1258076189.jpg

Den Mother Tisket! That would be a sweet title.

[BriarFox]

Too bad you can't have the sense or involvement that our Founding Fathers had. I sleep just fine and despite many posts confirming my stance that apparently you have missed in your lazy drive by trolling, I am not Christian and I don't pray to some God for strength to overcome the stupid in the world. I know that all things come to those who wait and all people get what is comming to them. In time, you and others will see the results of the damage that Liberal mush headed thinking does and regret it. Until then, suffer in your little world of needing the approval of the pack that drives you to troll with such miserable lack of skill.

I will continue to point out that your drive by trolling contributes nothing other than post count.

That's so sad. Were you abused by a priest as a child? Is that what caused you to lose all faith in the Holy Father? I will pray that God helps you get over your trauma.

[Androidpk]

Take 1 shot anytime Nachos, Briar Fox, or the others drive by a thread to simply add to their post count.

http://c3.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/83/l_ce9b38d5eeac484499912937c3e03ce2.gif

+1

[CrystalTears]

Take 1 shot anytime Nachos, Briar Fox, or the others drive by a thread to simply add to their post count.
http://cdn.smosh.com/smosh-pit/122010/batman-zoolander-2.gif
+1

[Showal]

Shots shots shots shots shots shots shots everybody!!!!

[BriarFox]

We gonna get SO crunk up in here.

[Cephalopod]

FIRST!!!!111!!!!!PANCAKES!!