Shock! Horror! Someone grew a plant!
Cultivated dope-smoking Welshman barred from own shed
A dope-smoking Welshman has been banned from entering the "potting shed" he used to grow cannabis, as he awaits sentencing on charges of cultivating marijuana and "possessing it with intent to supply". Simon Redclift, 53, was hauled before the beak following a police raid on his home in Dinas Powys, near Cardiff, the Daily …
-
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 04:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I stopped reading at..
Why? What are you afraid of?
Are you fearful of being drawn into the vortex of xenophobic, think of the children blinkered existence whipped up by the articles.
Dailymail reporters are some of the best in the world, they know exactly how to play to their readership. The wording of the articles is artistic, the recurring phrases that they know will elicit the most frenzied response. They can slip in a reference to paedophiles and the dangers of the internet in an article about cake mix.
Read it for what it is, an hilarious rag made more so by the comments. If you can't think for yourself then stick to El Reg. However methinks that for you to have such an opinion you must be a secret DM reader, come out of the closet, you've already opend the door. You can pretend you don't read it but now we all know you do.
-
Sunday 23rd June 2013 15:02 GMT John Smith 19
Re: I stopped reading at..
""... the Daily Mail reports.""
But you're missing the whole "English/Welshman's home is his castle/small businessman/state interference" vibe which sends DM frothing at the mouth for different reasons.
Now if had some photogenic teenage daughters as well...*
*Regular DM online readers know what I'm talking about.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 11:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
LOL at the judge
'It's one thing to say you enjoy smoking cannabis but another to say "I'm going to go on doing it because I do not agree with the law".'
presumably the courts in America said the same thing about the 18th amendment...
'It's one thing to say you enjoy drinking alcohol but another to say "I'm going to go on doing it because I do not agree with the law".'
and yes, one can draw a direct comparison. Alcohol is provably worse for you than cannabis (albeit taken through a vapouriser to prevent lung damage.)
-
-
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 01:09 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Banning a man from his shed?
What I want to know is: Now that he's taken it down, is he allowed to build another one in its place? What about a few feet away? What if it uses the same wood from the old shed?
If not, how long does this prohibition last? What if he moves - does he have to tear down any sheds at his new residence since he clearly can't be trusted around them?
It's all very odd.
-
-
Monday 24th June 2013 09:26 GMT Ed_UK
Re: Banning a man from his shed?
"But would it really be the same shed if he replaced a part of it?"
I was also wondering. This problem has occupied thinkers for millennia and has the official name "Ship of Theseus." More info at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_theseus
Of course, this does not answer whether the _intention_ of the ruling was to permanently deprive the man of his shed, any shed; a cruel and unusual punishment, probably covered under the Geneva Convention.
-
-
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 12:08 GMT Anomalous Cowshed
Somebody told me
...apparently a single plant of cannabis can yield a kilo of smokable stuff. That's quite incredible, no? I used to think it would take a whole field to produce a kg. But then I also used to think that the stuff that people smoked was the leaves, after they were dried. My ignorance apart, if only we didn't have silly laws and jobsworths to prevent us from growing these plants, we could grow a limitless supply on a small balcony or a shed. Everybody could have their pot. There would be no dealers, no market. There would be no justification for spending masses of resources on repression and keeping lots of police, government officials and judges busy dealing with it. It would be...oh hang on, I see the point now.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 13:44 GMT Alan Brown
Re: Somebody told me
"But then I also used to think that the stuff that people smoked was the leaves, after they were dried"
Aka "cabbage" and yes they did, mixed with heads. That way no tobacco needed be mixed in.
Some purists probably still do. I can't stand eiither but I still reckon this case is a bit OTT.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 18:16 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Somebody told me
hmm.... he's more likely to expect under half a kilo, the max he could get is up to about 750g (assuming optimum setup, Titsmarch's thumbs, a lighting installation to rival Twickenham's, etc), but of mediocre quality,say 350g a plant. "boutique" varieties are typically grown at home, for (choose some: ) potency, interesting flavors, yeild, size or ease (indoor idiot proof, just add light and water things).
poor shed.
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 22:07 GMT Trevor_Pott
Re: Somebody told me
You smoke the bud of the flower. Specifically you are looking for the "crystals". These "crystals" are in fact trichromes; in the case of marijuana a type of resin-bearing glandular hair that is where the bulk of the THC concentration lies.
Modern marijuana plants have been selectively bred to produce larger trichromes with a higher resin load; thus moving from largely microscopic elements of the plant bud to naked-eye-visible macro structures. If you have a particularly potent strain of marijuana you will notice what appear to be "shimmering crystals" on the bud (as opposed to merely a collection of white hairs.)
This is the difference between world-renowed strains (such as "BC Hydro" here in Canada) and the stuff your daddy smoked back in the day. It should be noted that the stuff your daddy smoked was an order of magnitude (or more) less potent than what can be had cheaply and easily today.
For the real nutjobs looking to engage in chemical lobotomy you can strip the trichromes from the bud using various mechanisms and then either extract the resin or ingest/inhale/etc the trichrome-rich "crystal powder". This will get rid of a lot of the carcinogens present in other parts of the plant (particularly if you smoke your marijuana) however is roughly as stupid as drinking 190 proof Everclear straight from the bottle.
The leaves of the marijuana plant are generally only used by enthusiasts who need "filler" to mix in with the buds that they smoke. There is no value (and a lot of downsides) to smoking what is essentially hemp fibres. (Just pick up a rug and smoke it. That's basically what smoking a marijuana leaf would net you.)
There you go, your herb lore has been levelled up. These same basic principals apply to many species beyond marijuana and are of particular interest for those working with Artemisia.
More information on tricromes:
http://www.ias.ac.in/resonance/Mar1998/pdf/Mar1998p41-45.pdf
http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/152/1/44.full.pdf
Your science has also been levelled up. You're welcome.
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 12:35 GMT Intractable Potsherd
Re: Somebody told me
Thanks, Trevor. As always, most informative. Whilst I can't think that I'll start on cannabis this late in life (hell, I don't even like being slightly drunk), at least I am more educated on a matter I've always been too paranoid to look up (you never know when an innocent search will come and bite you).
-
Monday 24th June 2013 12:19 GMT Slabfondler
Re: Somebody told me
Trevor - an informative post ruined by a rather unclever attempt at comedic hyperbole - to whit: "For the real nutjobs looking to engage in chemical lobotomy ...however is roughly as stupid as drinking 190 proof Everclear straight from the bottle." and a completely false statement: "The leaves of the marijuana plant are generally only used by enthusiasts who need "filler" to mix in with the buds that they smoke. There is no value (and a lot of downsides) to smoking what is essentially hemp fibres. (Just pick up a rug and smoke it. That's basically what smoking a marijuana leaf would net you.)". The source of hemp fibre are the fibrous (oh there's hint in there!) stems and not the leaves. While the leaves do not contain nearly as much THC as the female flowers (or male flowers for that matter), they, and to a far lesser extent, those fibrous stems, do contain THC.
-
Monday 24th June 2013 15:23 GMT Trevor_Pott
Re: Somebody told me
Hey, when you detox maybe we can have a real conversation. In the meantime, here's some knowledge for you:
THC is harmful to humans in high enough quantities. Doing a resin extract on high-grade marijuana (such as BC Hydro) from a relatively small number of bugs is more than enough to move from "pleasant recreational high" into "potential for harm."
The amount of THC to in a marijuana leaf when compared to the fibrous content moves the leaves out of any semblance of "useful for a high" and into "getting on as bad as tobacco". Smoking marijuana leaves will kill you, the same as smoking cigarettes will. To get a buzz off of marijuana leaves (with the one or two specially bred strains set to one side) you are going to have to smoke a god-awful amount of the stuff. Far - far - more than is healthy. What's more, you'll probably notice negative chemical interactions with non-THC things in those leaves way before the THC gets you baked.
So yeah, all things in moderation...and learn some science before you go sticking chemicals in your body, eh? Another thing worth considering: if you are so wrapped up in marijuana that someone pointing out that it does have downsides and must be taken in moderation is enough to feel to you as though you are personally attacked then you have a fucking problem. Emotionally bonding with a chemical substance enough to have incorporated it's use into your sense of personal identity is a strong component of psychological addiction and you probably want to have that looked at.
Take it from a hardcore caffiene addict: you're a hell of a lot better off if you can actually just walk away from the stuff. Not say you can, or think you can, but actually can. Control the use, man, don't let the use control you. Now get the heck out of my face I need more coffee.
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 12:08 GMT Nextweek
The cost
We really need a "Sense of Proportion Department". How much money was spend on prosecuting this person?
The amount of effort spent prosecuting a criminal should be proportional to the crime. In this instance a £100 fine from the local bobby should have been enough. Perhaps with a follow up visit in the next 6 months just to check.
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 14:21 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Intent to supply?
A plant can realistically yield 10oz. dried bud.
A plant can take 3 months to mature from seedling.
This guy was either a really heavy user, or just not a good businessman - because the amount he was growing was too much for one person, and not enough to make a large amount of money from (especially considering the size of his shed).
He may have been supplying to mates though.
A typical 'grown your own' setup would be two maturing plants, a mother plant (for cuttings) and possible 5-10 cuttings taking root to see which ones are going to be best to transfer to cultivation.
Any more than that and you really are making too much dope to explain away.
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 12:18 GMT lotus49
I think one can reasonably conclude from this that that no real crimes happen in this country, otherwise the police and courts would be spending their time dealing with thieves, rapists and murderers.
I count myself lucky that the most useful way that the law enforcement authorities can spend their time is prosecuting small producers of a relatively harmless drug. People clearly worry about crime unnecessarily in the UK.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 12:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
"I'm not going to cultivate again."
I like the implication that he's not going to give up smoking cannabis.
Which suggests he'll probably buy it. In the best case, he'll buy it of a bloke similar to himself; no real harm done. A more likely case is the money goes to a criminal gang who commit all sorts of criminal acts.
A real victory, no?
-
Friday 21st June 2013 14:09 GMT David Roberts
Custom built £800 shed?
Does this mean he assembled it himself?
GIYF and says that a decent quality 8 * 12 shed costs around £800 - 'budget' sheds around £500.
So just an average shed, then, although 'custom built' suggest something special.
Then again, budget shed, insulation, heater, overhead lights for 24 hour growing, blackout curtains, power from the house ......
Sounds quite cheap, all things considered :-)
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 16:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Good story
There's a metric shitload of evidence that smoking cigs is fatal to a lot of people, yet they are legal, although I'm sure that the government wouldn't allow it to be legalised these days.
The main point is that what people do to their own bodies should be a private affair.
Ah, but what about the health costs? Isn't that something that the government should be concerned about? Well what about the cost of injuries/deaths in car accidents? Skiiing is a risky business: perhaps we should ban that as well? Cyclists, they're always falling off and getting injured, that's obviously bad for you.
You can't legislate what people can and can't do to themselves or with consenting adults in their own home.
If you want to change what people choose to do, you must influence their attitudes with the power of argument and education.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 16:39 GMT Elmer Phud
Re: Good story
"I will be down voted aplenty for observing that there is gathering evidence that years of weed smoking can result in mental impairment & brain damage. Sorry about that! "
It seems that many youngsters who are apparently turned psycho from weed are also at exactly the right age to start showing signs of underlying mental issues that come on towards the later teens.
There are also so many TV news clips where it is pretty obvious that the parents involved are a wee bit authoritarian which can also bring about issues due to conflicts.
And there doesn't seem to be the hospital admissions that would indicate a rise in problems - if anything it's those caused by alcohol that are on the rise.
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 10:18 GMT Jim 59
Re: Good story
Some here say weed is fine because it is no worse than alcohol or tobacco. That is not an argument. Obviously weed is no worse than alcohol - but only because alcohol is terrible and would never be legalized if introduced today. Alcohol's impact on families and society is, for many people, appalling and life-wrecking. Alc and tobacco are perhaps the best arguments against legalizing any other drug. Personally I am 50:50.
-
-
Friday 21st June 2013 17:01 GMT Chris G
Re: Good story
I live on a small Mediterranean island where pot smoking occurs daily in many public places including the street and cafes and restaurants as well as notorious establishments where yoofs dance to loud music.
I have found that working here with regular users who often smoke several spliffs a day is a pain in the neck as the majority seem to suffer from chronic Attention Deficit Disorder brought on by said spliff smoking. They also generally are unable to remember relatively simple instructions for more than half an hour and worse uninterested in actually working for the money they expect at the end of the day.
Now I refuse to employ or work with regular users, I have no problem with anyone who likes the odd toke or a cookie or two but pot heads are a waste of space (and money).
I think legalising pot would just add to the numbers of useless space wasting potheads and if numbers of heavy users hit anything like the same numbers of heavy regular smokers it would have an adverse effect on society as a whole.
As for the horror stories about paranoia etc those are mostly attributed to regular and/or heavy smokers of hydroponically grown skunk which has much higher levels of the hallucinogen TCH, like anything that alters brain chemistry; too much is probably a bad thing.
-
Friday 21st June 2013 23:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Good story
"I will be down voted aplenty for observing that there is gathering evidence that years of weed smoking can result in mental impairment & brain damage. Sorry about that!"
I didn't down-vote you, because technically you are correct "can result in mental impairment" is indeed correct, and to a certain extent in a limited number of cases brain damage may occur also, however it is only realistic to say:
"Can result, NOT will result"
I also think those who have commented that stronger "skunk" and suchlike may have more of an impact in terms of paranoia, and having been there, and done that, I would certainly agree that there are cases and instances where it has done so, and will do so.
I do think - as someone else has already said - that if we grew our own there would be no massive organised criminal growing taking place, and of course then the police and courts could concentrate on other matters...
BUT...
I pay a lot of tax on tobacco products - an enormous amount of tax in fact (but then I smoke a lot).
I will also probably will not live as long as the average person, and IF i do develop cancer and it becomes terminal, my pre-death treatment, funeral, and all else will almost certainly cost you - my fellow tax-payers - far far less than it would to pay a pension for the extra years of life I would gain by not smoking.
I would much prefer the government to take control of the growing*, cultivation*, manufacturing into product*, and selling from licenced premises with a suitable level of taxation applied.
It could be provided more cheaply than dealers charge, and till have more than 50% of the purchase price being tax, and tax is good for the government.
Why should non-pot-smoking taxpayers have to contribute to the cost of paying for the war on drugs, when the cost to society would be far less if some (or all...) of the funding for a war on drugs came from taxation of lesser evils.
Surely it is logical?
-
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 18:31 GMT b 3
class b ???
gordon boom ("brown) asked 5 experts (in about 2005 i think) whether or not not w33d should be a class c or a class b. they all said leave it class c (where it was). he chose to make it BACK to a class b.
class c drugs are not covered by the ARA (the asset recovery agency) whereas class b ARE!
-
Saturday 22nd June 2013 22:30 GMT JaitcH
The British and their Sheds
I know of no other nation that has such a fetish with 'sheds'. The Americans have their car ports and pools along with the obligatory BBQ, the Canadians their basements but only the British, seemingly, fancy sheds. In the Far East roof tops can be interesting.
Sheds are often smelly and house everything from mini-front rooms from where to escape the family, to model train setups to even storing garden tools and motor-mowers - no more smelly ATCOs though.
This Judge Morgan is a fool for saying "he was considering ordering its destruction". What a petty minded imbecile he must be.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
