Cannabis Crackdown

[Craze]

Yeah I think this is definitely gonna backfire on Trump. If I were his advisor I would tell him to end the federal criminalization of marijuana. Millions of Democrats would become Trumpists over night

Next time someone lies through their teeth and claims that conservatives are for 'small government', remind them of Jeff Sessions.

Not all Conservatives are created equally my friend

 

[Cassius Critzer]

Reagan Democrats and Dixiecrats voted for President Trump. He did not win based upon being Republican and honestly he is not A Republican but a Labor Democrat. It is just odd how strange the Democratic party has become such to make them removed from their historic base. And it didn't work as they lost members still to Sanders.

I don't understand why the crackdown is occurring now unless the timing is to apply political pressure for other issues, and then negotiated to find a compromise.

It came out of no where. I'm not sure there is any significant support exists on this issue.

Fentanyl was created for intractable pain and in patch form, and extremely powerful and addictive. So the niche should be tiny and few should be on it legally. It is 75 x stronger than morphine if that is believable.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Suppose I have a license for medical cannabis in a state where it is legal, and carry it with me to a state where it is not. Is the other state obliged to recognize my license for it?

No it's still very much illegal to cross state lines with cannabis. This is true whether or not both states have fully legalized it or if one has and one hasn't.

I do not have a good grasp on the legal framework that applies here, I just know that interstate anything to do with cannabis is illegal.

 

[Cutlass]

Not all Conservatives are created equally my friend

Of course not. But none of them are for small government. The concept is fundamentally incompatible with the ideology.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I'm drunk right now but I think that word should be incompatible

You know what's a beautiful word? DISCOMBOBULATED. Rolls off the tongue.

 

[Cutlass]

Fixed.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Yeah I think this is definitely gonna backfire on Trump. If I were his advisor I would tell him to end the federal criminalization of marijuana. Millions of Democrats would become Trumpists over night

Just keep smoking that Pot and keep voting Republican.

President Trump Says Countries That Had Success Dealing With Drugs Chose To Be 'Very Harsh'

Countries that are “very harsh” on drug epidemics and “take it very seriously” have less difficulty curbing the problem, claimed President Donald Trump in a press conference on Saturday.
Trump said that he was concerned about the drugs “pouring into this country” and that “we’ve never had a problem with drugs like we do” right now.

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-countries-are-harsh-drugs-have-less-difficulty-773168?piano_t=1

 

[BvBPL]

The more important cannabis crackdown is in the states themselves. States where voters basically overruled the career law enforcement and judicial personnel and demanded legalization face having the offended and entrenched opponents transitioning smoothly into "okay, now we are the regulatory agency and will destroy your sources."

Regulation of mind-altering substances is absolutely appropriate.

Like the heyday of liquor licensing, being awarded a pot license is going to be a festering sore of cronyism and kickbacks, and supply and demand is going to drive the price of the very limited legal pot into the stratosphere...unless 90% of the market continues to be supplied by illegal sources.

Not actually what's happening. Not at all. In fact, the opposite is happening.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Not actually what's happening. Not at all. In fact, the opposite is happening.

In WASHINGTON...please READ before playing the "you are WRONG" card.

Washington did basically the exact opposite of what was done in Colorado, and got different results; results that actually favor the consumers who voted in legalization in the first place. California instituted the same sort of half baked plan that Colorado used, and it is predictable that they will get similar results, but on a massive scale.

 

[Cassius Critzer]

Wouldn't the most fair system allow for personal cultivation in a manner representative of beer, wine, and spirits? Right now as long as you don't sell it, and extremely careful where any exchange looks like barter, then all Americans are legally allowed to produce enough for their own consumption.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alcohol_laws_of_the_United_States

Individual states remain free to restrict or prohibit the manufacture of beer, mead, hard cider, wine, and other fermentedalcoholic beverages at home.[3] Homebrewing beer became legal in all 50 states in 2013 as the governor of Mississippisigned a bill legalizing homebrewing on March 19, 2013 and as the governor of Alabama signed a bill legalizing homebrewing of beer and wine which came into effect on May 9, 2013.[4] The Mississippi bill went into effect July 1, 2013.[5] Most states allow brewing 100 US gallons (380 L) of beer per adult per year and up to a maximum of 200 US gallons (760 L) per household annually when there are two or more adults residing in the household.[6] Because alcohol is taxed by the federal government via excise taxes, homebrewers are prohibited from selling any beer they brew. This similarly applies in most Western countries. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter signed into law a bill allowing home beers, which was at the time not permitted without paying the excise taxes as a holdover from the prohibition of alcoholic beverages (repealed in 1933).[3][7] This change also exempted home brewers from posting a "penal bond" (which is currently $1000.00).

You can make wine even fortified wine, for example like Port.

That would be the most fair system rather than licensure, but I guess Mary Jane is scary as inducing madness and must be regulated. If people only make a product for themselves then who cares? Historically there are limits to the amount that can be produced based upon methodology, labor, cultivation, harvesting, processing, fermentation, bottling, etc. All of which is self-limiting and actually then regulates human behavior on consumption.

If you have to do that much work then alcoholism is unlikely. The same would arguably be true for cultivation using hydroponics to create your own stash.

 

[Hrothbern]

"Countries that are “very harsh” on drug epidemics and “take it very seriously” have less difficulty curbing the problem, claimed President Donald Trump in a press conference on Saturday".

So Mr Trump..... how about countries that do NOT have drug epidemics ?

BTW because they do not apply ENEMY thinking about it

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Wouldn't the most fair system allow for personal cultivation in a manner representative of beer, wine, and spirits? Right now as long as you don't sell it, and extremely careful where any exchange looks like barter, then all Americans are legally allowed to produce enough for their own consumption.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alcohol_laws_of_the_United_States

You can make wine even fortified wine, for example like Port.

That would be the most fair system rather than licensure, but I guess Mary Jane is scary as inducing madness and must be regulated. If people only make a product for themselves then who cares? Historically there are limits to the amount that can be produced based upon methodology, labor, cultivation, harvesting, processing, fermentation, bottling, etc. All of which is self-limiting and actually then regulates human behavior on consumption.

If you have to do that much work then alcoholism is unlikely. The same would arguably be true for cultivation using hydroponics to create your own stash.

This is pretty much the core element of the California state law. They pass down regulatory authority to cities and counties, but prohibit those cities and counties from infringing upon a certain minimal level of personal cultivation and use. So, yeah, everyone in California could be growing their own six plants (under specific conditions) and puffing away and there is nothing that a city or county could do to stop anyone.

The problem is that growing your own pot is not really like brewing your own beer. Brewing beer, the alcohol level is going to be in the effective range mostly automatically, and what defines success is the flavor. I might brew my own and say "tastes like crap," but it would still "work" pretty much like any store bought beer. On the other hand, growing your own pot is not going to produce anything that works like what the current market is accustomed to. If we were talking about braiding out our own hemp ropes it would be different, but for recreational use a certain effect is expected from smoking it.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

"Countries that are “very harsh” on drug epidemics and “take it very seriously” have less difficulty curbing the problem, claimed President Donald Trump in a press conference on Saturday".

Trump's role mode is Duterte. A good, virtuous Christian leader who knows how to deal with junkies!

 

[Hrothbern]

Trump's role mode is Duterte. A good, virtuous Christian leader who knows how to deal with junkies!

yeahhh
A race to the bottom...



And on a weird sidenote (reading atm the book "The Concept of Woman" by sister Prudence Allen, unbelievable good book)

About that Christian....
I wonder how many Saints would not have been declared Saints by Rome, if it were not for the widespread use of hallicunating drugs among monks and others, especially in medieval times, causing their visions !!!
After all... visions (from drugs) were the true connection with God, and therefore justified. This concept dominating more than a thousand years christianity.
Saint Hildegard (1098-1179), considered to be the foundier of scientific natural history in Germany, in 2012 recognised by Rome as Doctor of the Church, was of the opinion that all herbs were free to use by humans (and her opinion carried much weight for the church)

But what would a primitive macho Duterte know or care about her opinions..... she being a woman as well..
also being one of the most influential christian feminists of medieval time ...

 

[Borachio]

Well, I don't know.

I think the Chinese experience during the opium wars was salutary.

Didn't they make consumption of opium a capital offence? And didn't that discourage repeat offending quite effectively?

Might have cost them Hong Kong and Shanghai though. So maybe not good in the long run.

As for Duterte, wasn't he sexually abused by a priest when he was a minor? That might explain, though not excuse, a lot.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Saint Hildegard (1098-1179)

dude. duuuuuudeeeee. i'm totally tripping right now lmao (on god)

 

[Cassius Critzer]

I would bet that all indigenous people have used mind altering substances throughout history. Fermentation is not complicated and so that is entirely normal as even when you could do it, it was limited due to the work involved, and nothing like the ease of alcoholism today. Likewise we could surmise that the mystery religions gave substances based upon reports.

So I have no problem with people fermenting their own drink or smoking whacky weed.

Where I get alarmed is when people talk about potency and intensity because that is dangerously close to addiction. The ugliest aspect of my life experiences have been dealing with drug and alcohol addiction. It is such a destroyer that it ruins families. I cannot support anyone trying to make a stronger weed or bemoaning that they cannot do so.

 

[Hygro]

Why is potency discussion dangerously close to addiction?

 

[Cassius Critzer]

When a person needs a more potent drink that indicates the beginning of dopamine overload. When you use a substance, then pleasure is registered by the release of neurotransmitters. So the body wants to feel even more pleasure so it generates more receptors so as to get more flooding of dopamine.

So what happens is diminishing returns. It takes more of the intoxicating substance to get the same rush because you have a lot more neutrotransmitter receptors and the limited release is spread across them.

At that point, addicts switch to a more potent or more intense substance or both. They start taking spirits instead of wine. They switch from mary jane to hash.

But the same thing happens due to upregulation of receptors in a VICIOUS cycle. You can never get enough but keep chasing it. At least that is one model.

Different intoxicating substances use different neutrotransmitters. Interestingly porn and gambling both give the same rush to some people using dopamine too. Which is why people will engage in increasingly risky behavior to get a fix or high.

https://www.helpguide.org/harvard/how-addiction-hijacks-the-brain.htm

This is why I am so repulsed by substance abuse because I have witnessed junkies ruin healthy relationships, commit outrageous behavior, risk it all, to get high.

Mary Jane is supposedly safer than drinking a Coke, but has a psychological potential to act as a gateway drug. Typically ethanol with MJ while partying and engaging in hookups at a time of high levels of STDs.

Regardless other drugs are used at the same party and while inebritated, and with the frontal lobe clouded which overrides due to moral judgement, so impaired the young person takes other things to keep the buzz going and to fit in.

 

[Hygro]

What you’re describing, the downregulation (not upregulation as you say) of neurotransmitter receptors is definitely a function getting less out an amount of active ingredients. How that means potency preferences are an addict’s talk, rather than the talk of someone curating a specific experience, is not substantiated by that logic.

If I take MDMA one single time, my experience will be quite different by the potency of my capsule (in this case, by volume measured in milligrams times purity). Whether or not I experience seratonin receptor downregulation is pretty much irrelevant because it is after the fact (and might not occur at recreational doses for some people, but that’s an aside). If I want to do it again, downregulation will be largely irrelevant unless I do it right away. And if I take bunch of molly, and I get a little fried, no amount of discussion of potency could matter during the recovery period because the drug won’t work at all. And lastly, maybe I want the purest good stuff, the most potent per volume, so that I have the least ill effects or so I can dose smaller amounts and still have fun.

You see what I’m saying? There are other paths to discussing potency that aren’t “how do I get my regular fix to feel special again”