KushMcDieselsonMember Since 14 Mar 2014
- Group ROOKIE
- Active Posts 46
- Profile Views 503
- Member Title NOT NEWB
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday Birthday Unknown
Favorite NFL Team
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 17 May 2014 - 08:27 AM
A lot of people around here really put off the arrogant, "my poo doesn't stink", kind of attitude, especially if you aren't in the "inner circle" of huddlers....you know, the ones who make a post on almost every topic, especially if it's a "controversial" one, proceeds to pick out and start a flame war with a poster who doesn't agree with them, and eventually their final argument will be one declaring how great they and their life is, listing examples of their achievements and goals personal belongings to prove how awesome every one on an internet forum should think they are, and at the same time contradicting themselves with a statement about how they don't have time for this on an internet forum.
I think that's why there are so many trolls here, they've realized it's impossible to talk to a lot of you, because most users without thousands of posts are constantly put down for having any opinion that deviates from the majority, or all but ignored unless you are a power player, even when you agree.
But back on topic, I'm a huge Carolina Panthers fan and a Steve Smith fan, fug what y'all think, and I will root for both, except on that fateful Sunday that he promised blood and guts. On that Sunday, I shall pour out some of my 40 in remembrance of all the things he did for us, and also in anticipation of the carnage that our D is going to cause.
Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 13 May 2014 - 12:51 PM
communicating a threat:
" get your poo and get out or imma throw everything you own in the front yard"
assault on a female
- thats my cell phone... removes it from her possession.
and if its a DV.... say goodbye to your firearm rights... the only misdeameanor that can do that...
ask me how i know
(luckily i have a great lawyer )
I'm sure no one here agrees with domestic violence, and we're all smart enough to know everything is speculation at this point, but it really is ridiculously easy to get a man thrown in jail for domestic violence.
Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 09 May 2014 - 08:20 AM
That video might have been cool, till you showed me those ***** as F slippers, you're a grown man bro. Act like it. Cammy Cam? Douche.
Cool story bro, tell it again. No seriously though, grown men stop calling each other bro after high school and college, and if you don't own a pair of slippers then you are missing out my friend. Nothing like standing on the back patio in your slippers and boxers, dick swinging in the breeze, enjoying a morning cup of coffee.
Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 07 May 2014 - 03:15 PM
If the actual owners of the company did not care....they would not require a test.
You are doing mental gymnastics to try and support a failed logic. You think smoking week is no big deal, so everyone should think that way.
Apparently the owners of the company that he is interviewing with DO CARE.
You're missing the concept here, what he's trying to say is that the drug testing policy is in place as a way of protecting themselves from any liability, not that they actually care about people smoking cannabis. It's all about profits and limiting liability. That's why large corporations are mostly guaranteed to do preemployment drug testing, while smaller "mom and pop" type operations usually require limited drug testing. Both sectors will do drug testing if it will save them money and liability. If any of you non smoker's really had a clue as to how many people you deal with on a regular basis that do in fact smoke, you'd be blown away. If you've eaten at a restaurant, had home repairs or remodeling done, had an IT guy come and fix your computer, there is probably a 75% chance a smoker was involved, and he might have even been high while he was doing it.
- Happy Panther PIE'd this
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 07 May 2014 - 02:32 PM
I passed drug tests while I was smoking pot, but I can promise you not once did I have to ask someone else how to do it. You know why?> Because I am smart enough to figure it out on my own.
Holy poo, talk about the pot calling the kettle black, you spend 15 pages telling this dude what he is doing is totally immoral and wrong and he is a terrible person and doesn't deserve to get the job, for doing something you admit to doing in your past.
I can assure you that I have more life experience with every single aspect of this conversation that you do.
Yet instead of providing him with some useful information about his original question, you continuously tell him how bad of person he is, and how he should be making better life decisions, just like you. He didn't post a thread asking for motivational "I've been down in the dumps and hit rock bottom all because of the terrible reefers, please help me turn my life around you guys?" He just asked how to pass a simple piss test.
This is the "holier than thou" that a previous poster mentioned.
- Harris Aballah PIE'd this
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 07 May 2014 - 12:06 PM
Not only does it look like the Trix bunny shat all over them, but it's seriously only 2 kinds, frosted or frosted with sprinkles, the colors or shapes of the icing don't make it a different variety lol. I know both stores do actually carry a variety, but as previously stated, if you want a cake with a hole in it, go to DD, if you want a hot piece of heaven that deliciously melts in your mouth, stop by BRITT'S from Spring through Fall.
fixed that poo.
Never been there, had to google them, obviously a local shop should poo all over a corporate chain lol, but at least I can get my KK year round, and 24 hours even haha.
- StepandFetch PIE'd this
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 06 May 2014 - 04:19 PM
Not arguing whether weed should be legalized. However, the arguement that it should be legalized because it is a "plant" is moronic.
Poppy seeds are a plant too...guess we should legalize heroine based on your logic.
Not even the same. It should be legalized because it is a plant that grows straight out of the dirt naturally, and requires no processing to be enjoyed. All the processing done to cannabis is optional based on your preferences.
Poppy seeds are processed to make opium which is further processed with a whole slew of dangerous chemicals to create the heroin. But you forgot that heroin is already legal in America, you just have to go to a doc and get a prescription for one of the many opium based pain killers on the market, because the pharmaceutical industry is in bed with Uncle Sam. That's why their heroin is legal, and their synthetic THC is legal, but the street stuff isn't.
I mean tobacco is just a plant, right? Why is it any different than cannabis? Because the tobacco companies are also in bed with Uncle Sam, so they take their cut and don't care that it's processed and laced with multitudes of poisonous chemicals. The legalization of cannabis will eventually come when the government fully realizes the money they are missing out on, simple as that.
Saying cannabis should be legalized because it's a plant isn't moronic. Comparing cannabis to heroin? That is on a whole different level of dumb.
But back on topic, these guys are fuging idiots for not stopping for at least 30 days before they knowingly had a drug test coming up, every responsible cannabis user will agree.
Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
- AceBoogie PIE'd this
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 05 May 2014 - 07:20 PM
Not only does it look like the Trix bunny shat all over them, but it's seriously only 2 kinds, frosted or frosted with sprinkles, the colors or shapes of the icing don't make it a different variety lol. I know both stores do actually carry a variety, but as previously stated, if you want a cake with a hole in it, go to DD, if you want a hot piece of heaven that deliciously melts in your mouth, stop by a KK when the glorious hot light is on.
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 17 April 2014 - 09:18 AM
Also, they will eventually destroy the Kong as well, but it will easily last ten times longer than other toys, and if you can find the black ones instead of the red ones, they are for the serious chewer and will last even longer.
Definitely check out all your lease paperwork for breed/weight restrictions and animal fees, keep her leashed in public, and pick up your dog's crap, so annoying that people won't clean up after their dogs lol. They're an amazing breed when properly cared for, but the stigma is there so it's up to you be a "breed ambassador". Not saying that you necessarily want to go all activist and change everyone's opinion, but if you take your dog in public everything you do and do not do will sway the public's opinion for all of us pibble owners.
Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 16 April 2014 - 04:41 PM
Actually I think this is completely wrong although I am not a Poli-Sci guy.
Some rights are considered inalienable such as life. The rest fall into different buckets but many/most are legally bestowed rights. In the complete absence of government yes I suppose you are correct but the "right" to drive itself only exists because the government has provided roads.
Most rights are bestowed by the government or allowed because they aren't explicitly denied.
Saying you have the right to tinted windows is like saying you have the right to a cell phone
The "right to drive" itself doesn't only exist because the government has provided roads. The "right to drive" exists because the government decided to give you the right to drive, as long as you follow the laws we set in place for you. The "right to drive" used to be "can you afford to buy one of them new fangled iron horse machine things?" Then the government stepped in and said you get this "right" after you jump through our legal hoops and pay us our money, because we need to pay for our roads. So if you want to get technical about it, the roads exist because the government "gave" us the optional "right" to drive the cars. It's optional because we don't require you to exercise this right, but if you want access to this right, you gotta pay up.
"Most rights are bestowed by the government or allowed because they aren't explicitly denied." This is exactly my point. As a human being, I have the right to whatever I see fit, not what the government "bestows upon me". In the short time I have on this pale blue dot, no one has the right to tell me what my rights are. A lot of people feel this exact same way. Yes I have a right to own a cell phone, just like I have the right to tint my windows and own a gun. Doesn't mean that everyone chooses to exercise their own rights to a cell phone, or a gun or tint their windows. But owning a gun is an actual right you say? Why? Once again, because the government put it on paper and "bestowed the right to bear arms" to us. Really, all of our rights are just options, that we choose whether or not to use.
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 16 April 2014 - 03:06 PM
You are free to go live where tax money doesn't maintain your roads or your water and sewer systems. You are free to go where money is not does not go to funding a police and fire department. If you do not value those things go somewhere they don't exist. Most people value these things and are ok with paying for them.
No where did I say I disagreed with all taxes, because I don't. We do need taxes on some things, to keep certain portions of our government and country running. You use water and sewer systems as an example, but if you live in the country on well water, neither of those are of your concern. See, you can pick and choose and use blanket statements to shoot down my opinion, or you can read my statements for what they were, examples of the over reaching ways of the government. We are taxed to death, and you are naive to think all of our taxes directly benefit the people, when we have lifelong senators making hundreds of thousands a year. Being a politician used to be a secondary job, because we voted them in. Along the way they realized they could turn it into life long careers, by continually approving their own raises. But that's going off on another tangent. The point I was making, some people don't believe the government should have such massive and far reaching control over it's constituents to be making such mundane decisions for them like how dark they want the tint on their windows, or how big the new deck they are building on the back of their house can be, and then have the audacity to charge US for making the decisions for US.
Another idiot who does not understand the true meaning of the word right.
Everything in your life is NOT a right.
Please define what exactly a right is. Multiple times you have called someone an idiot for not knowing what a true right is, but have yet to bestow your wisdom upon us. Who exactly gets to determine what is a right and what isn't? The government? So the only rights we have, are the ones they allow us to have? I mean I know about the constitution and the bill of rights, I went to school, even graduated and all that. Expand your horizons beyond american law. As a human being, everything in your life IS a right. You have the right to do whatever the hell you want. You are free to make whatever decisions you want. Most of us normal, decent human beings, CHOOSE not to do messed up things, because we have a moral compass and know the difference between right and wrong. Some people just don't have the common decency to take into consideration when their choices will affect someone else, so we require laws in place to force accountability on people for their actions or to deter them from making those choices. We can all agree some laws should be in place, even though they should be common sense, human nature is a bitch, and some people are flat out crazy. But to think that the only rights we have are the one explicitly granted to us by the government is a load of crap.
- KJ89 PIE'd this
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 16 April 2014 - 02:08 PM
"having tinted windows isn't a right"
Everything in your life is a right you have until the law decides it's not. I own my car, therefor I have the right to do whatever I want to it. The government doesn't like me doing whatever I want to my car, so they decide "fine, do whatever you want to the car you own, but if you don't obey our laws, then you can't drive it on our roads(that you pay to have constructed with your taxes)." It is exactly this that makes people place high value on their personal freedoms, not as an american, but as a human being. The government shouldn't be making decisions about my life. The only person responsible for my choices are me. I'm not saying all laws are bad, human nature is too damn ignorant to be totally left to our own, but the money hungry government far overreaches it's boundaries on a regular basis. More examples? You already own your car, but hey you have to pay us taxes on it every year or we won't let you pay us for your license plate renewal that we require you to have to drive on the roads you already paid for. Hey, you own your house and your land? Well if you don't keep paying us to own it we are going to have to place a lien against you and confiscate it. Oh by the way, we know you own the house and the land, but you can't just go building onto your house or your land however you want to, you gotta follow our laws, and also pay us a bunch of fees for permits and stuff, because I mean without us telling you it's ok to own property and what to do with it, you might hurt yourself or others around you.
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 16 April 2014 - 02:00 PM
People should really take the time to learn what their rights are as a citizen. No, the police can't search you just because they pulled you over. In a traffic stop, the only questions you are by law legally required to answer are about the reason you were stopped. Probably cause is easily obtained by claiming they smell something, but if they claim that and a search turns up nothing, then they have violated your rights and it could cause them extra legal grief. They will only resort to that if they think they are guaranteed to find something.
Posted by KushMcDieselson on 16 April 2014 - 01:48 PM
I think a lot of statements are being misconstrued and misinterpreted here, in order to demonstrate one's on opinions.
Your stance on LEO's will obviously be determined by your actual experiences and locations. Not all cops are dicks, but they aren't all saints either. If you live in a great city with a low crime rate, congratulations, you more than likely deal with the good guys, actually doing their jobs, pulling over people that are in fact breaking laws. We don't always agree with the laws, but that's a different paragraph.
If you live in a s***hole of a city, then you probably have more experience with the dirty cops, who will in fact pull you over for nothing. We call them fishing expeditions. Sure, they'll fabricate a reason for the stop, but all they really want to know is whether or not you will consent to a search. "Sure officer, you claim I rolled through that stop sign, so that obviously means I am up to all sorts of illegal activities behind the wheel, go ahead and tear my car apart." Even worse, if you know your rights and actually exercise them, aka refuse to give consent to search(how dare an american citizen have privacy expectations!),they will tell you how guilty it makes you look, act like even bigger dicks and use bully and scare tactics in any attempt to gain consent to search. When they finally give up, after all that trouble and time, and still don't write a ticket for the original offense, it really makes it hard to deny that the original reason for the stop was a load of crap. You can in fact be pulled over for being white in america, but only if you are in a black neighborhood. Because if you're white, the only reason you are in a black neighborhood is for drugs or other crime related things, because all the people in that neighborhood are lowlife scum, there isn't a single decent one there(if you ask the LEO's around here anyways). Life on the other side of all those picket white fences in suburbia ain't exactly unicorns and rainbows. Just because you don't experience these things, doesn't mean they don't exist, and it doesn't mean the people who do experience these things are some how below you. I've been a lurker on these forums for awhile and there seems to be a large amount of elitist pricks on here.
As far as "it's just window tint, who cares?" Some people actually place a high value on personal choice, liberties and freedoms, so it sort of comes down the "sacrifice the wants of a few for the needs of many" mentality. A crappy driver is a crappy driver, tint or no tint. A crappy driver MIGHT pick dark tint for his windows, then he MIGHT get into a wreck, and it MIGHT have been solely to blame on his choice of tint. Should my right to choose dark tint for my vehicle's windows be taken away for something that MIGHT happen? Yes, it's just window tint this time, but the government has a tendency to invade our private lives with their laws on a regular basis, taking away certain personal freedoms and choices, and you can apply the same logic to plenty of different things, so where does the line get drawn? That's where a lot people tend to agree and disagree on laws, well that, and the whole money grab thing, some laws really are just in place to make an extra buck wherever the government can squeeze us.
You guys should probably check the tint laws, which vary from place to place. In North Carolina, for instance, cars and only the front windows of suv's and vans are required to have between 32 and 35 percent light transmission. Trucks, the back window's of suv's and vans, commercial for hire vehicles(limo's, taxi's, etc.) ambulances, and a few other instances can have whatever light transmission you want. If it was for police officer safety or driver safety, don't you think they'd have the same laws in place for the large trucks/vans/suv's as they do for cars? Or are they simply stating that only drivers of sedans are potential criminals hiding something and tint only affects the driver's vision and ability to drive in a sedan? I mean a car is a lot smaller than a van, I can't imagine why they think it's safe for a van to have blacked out windows but not a Toyota Camry. Oh wait, maybe it's for the privacy of whatever cargo you may be carrying. Sorry sedan driver's you don't get privacy. I'm sure the laws have absolutely nothing to do with the extra inspection fees required of tinted windows on a yearly basis.
Also, for the "tint laws are for the safety of the police" crowd, I pose this question: if a criminal is pulled over and decides he's not going back to jail, do you think he'd say to himself "Man, if only this tint on the window were a little darker, I'd be able to get my gun out and shoot him in the face and drive off, but since he can clearly see the back of my head, and only the back of my head, there's no way I'll be able to hide this gun in my lap until he's close enough to my window."? If you answered yes, that the tinted windows would make all the difference in that situation, you are retarded. No sugar coated way to put it.