If you had access to this equipment...

[olllllo]

why is it a bad idea to use it?


Be specific.

 

[Joker]

1. If the brew sucked, there's whole lot of suck there.
2. How could you go back to 5 or 10 gallons after that.

 

[Cheesefood]

Bee-kawz ma granpaw use'd to say that brewin' waz fer queers and liberals.

SRV Lives!

 

[mr x]

You get fined for going over your homebrew limit and the government seizes your beer.

 

[Schlenkerla]

You'd be bottling until 2009!

Not to mention your arms would be sore from using your wing capper that long.

 

[Flyin' Lion]

Is it brew related equipment? I would say hazardous, we have chemical containers like that where I work that I would never conisder brewing in no matter how much I cleaned them.

It's hard for me to pick out any details in the picture.

EDIT: the floor is a pretty shade of blue. Maybe to make a chemical spill readily apparent?

 

[Joker]

You'd be bottling until 2009!

Not to mention your arms would be sore from using your wing capper that long.

I would have to argue 2009 for kegging, 2010 at least for bottling. Not to mention the number of wing cappers he would probably kill in the process. :fro:

 

[Schlenkerla]

SWMBO would claim that I don't love her any more!!!

 

[olllllo]

Well, you'd definately have the authorities on your back.

 

[Evets]

Well, you'd definately have the authorities on your back.

Is that a clue?

 

[olllllo]

Is that a clue?

Yep. Those guys belong to a group that starts with an I.
And you'd have to move. That also starts with an I.

 

[Dude]

Whachoo got going ollllllllllllllo?

 

[olllllo]

It's the Iranian uranium enrichment program and you'd be under the scrutiny of the IAEA

Amazing how it looks like brewing equipment.

 

[cd2448]

But surely they'd be happy to hear you were using the gear to make Imperial IPAs and the like instead of enriching uranium, no?

 

[howlinowl]

Hmmm....an uranium enriched double India Pale Ale, or UEIIPA, if you will.

It's hoppy and glows in the dark.

 

[BierMuncher]

You get fined for going over your homebrew limit and the government seizes your beer.

What limit you talkin bout Willis?

 

[landhoney]

Amazing how it looks like brewing equipment.

Are you saying I can start enriching uranium with my homebrew set-up? Can you sell enriched uranium to pay for brewing? Or do I have to get a license?

 

[Jesse17]

What limit you talkin bout Willis?

I believe he's referring to the fact that you can only brew 200 gal. per year in the US. of beer per household, if there are two or more people in the household. Only 100 gal. if you live by yourself.

As to the picture...Those bastards! They thought they could start a secret beer development program by simply claiming it was a uranium enrichment program. I'm appalled! Have they no decency?

 

[Evets]

Ah, now I see.
If the original post had included the terrori..., uh, technicians,...... maybe I'd have guessed it.

 

[ForRealBeer]

I thought that may not be brewing equipment.

I worry less about Iran's nuclear program than I do about their potential to build a biological weapons program, and that, my friends, COULD be done in homebrewing equipment. Granted it wouldn't be sophisticated, but you can grow all kinds of nasties in conicals and other equipment you know and use that would mess up a lot of people's days.

Why do I not worry so much about Iran and nuclear weapons? Because one of these would be enough to turn them into glass:

And we have LOTS of them. And they know it.

 

[Cheeto]

yummy,
I like yellow cake

 

[EvilTOJ]

The radiation has summoned the thread zombies!

 

[SMOKEU]

You get fined for going over your homebrew limit and the government seizes your beer.

What homebrew limit? Why would the government sieze your beer?

 

[olllllo]

In the US, Federal law limits brewing to 100 gallon per year limit per adult in the household with a maximum of 200 gallons.

State law may be more restrictive or not all it all (in about 5 states).
http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/pages/government-affairs/statutes

Most states that are restrictive are not pro-active in enforcement, although there have been a few chilling examples, notably in Alabama.


http://www.auburnbrewclub.org/2009/...s-up-to-the-2009-alabama-legislative-session/

On March 6, 2008, Ben Cunningham of the Anniston Star covered Alabama homebrewing.
The Los Angeles Times sent a writer and photographer to cover the February, 2008, monthly meeting of the Rocket City Brewers and published an article on March 10, 2008. The LA Times story was reprinted in various forms by United Press International, Chicago Tribune, Fox News in Seattle, the Huffington Post, Fox in Indianapolis, the Baltimore Sun, the Mobile Press Register and the Boston Globe. As a result of the publicity, the Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board paid a visit to the house of Scott Oberman, a 9 year Army veteran who’d hosted the meeting and was prominently pictured in the LA Times in front of his homebrewing equipment, warning him about his illegal activity. Due to his employment with a Department of Defense contractor responsible for Black Hawk Helicopter engineering issues, and the strict security clearances associated with that employment, Scott had to remove his homebrewing equipment from his home and continues to await legalization in Alabama to resume brewing at home.

 

[arturo7]

Holy necroposting, Batman!!