Posted on 07/14/2021 5:13:59 AM PDT by Rennes Templar
Edited on 07/14/2021 7:48:08 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
“ It is literally impossible to overdose on cannabis,”
Of course. I was referring to the legalization of all drugs.
I agree! A way of getting new democratic voters!
Bottom line....? There are nuances to growing weed. Southern Oregon hasn’t had huge problems cranking out crops. A lot of it is bound for out of State black markets, though. Plenty of people are smoking weed for free, though, and giving away excess product.
There was a glass shop in town...a rather depressed little town...that had a couple of blown glass bongs with price tags of $3500 and $5000 on them. Maybe some of the tech guys that blow through town in Ferraris might buy them. Who knows? But the homeless don’t seem to have any trouble getting weed if they want it.
Biden is against it, sounds like Schoomer is just patronizing his Left flank.
Just what the country needs another intoxicant.
Here in the New York market, which is in a weird state because it’s technically legal to own but illegal to sell right now - I can only imagine that they will be basing the pricing on the neighboring states that have legalized it years ago.
Average price per gram for flower in the NE USA is 17-20 usd per gram (!!!)
It’s not like it’s new. But that’s what I call it. Some of the people at the lake I like to fish asked why I didn’t smoke. It boils down to alcohol, or weed, being intoxicated in the park all day doesn’t appeal to me. Granted, many of them lived there.
Defense lawyers most affected.
I’m sure I could find varieties going for that much, and higher. If you’re interested in the market from an investment standpoint, that’s a better guide than the free weed that abounds. With intoxicants, the availability of cheap whiskey doesn’t really undercut the market for single malt scotches. As things currently stand, weed isn’t supposed to cross State lines. The Maui Wowie being sold in Oregon must be grown in Oregon. I doubt it’s the same as the Hawaiian grown stuff. Breeders have done all kinds of crazy stuff (remember that just because America was under prohibition, parts of Europe were not) with varieties that will grow in different climates, at different latitudes, indoors or out.
I agree!
The reason I call myself theoretical libertarian on this is the following.
1. How do yo separate out the 3rd party effects? Such as intoxicated and driving etc. Well people say we handle alcohol abuse in that regard. Yes we do, and its a problem but another intoxicant will just increase the problem.
2. Politically you're going to be forced to pay for the consequences of use. More intoxicants to choose from, more use, the more the “state” (someone) will reach into your pocket to pay for the consequences. If someone can reach into my pocket to pay for this I want a say through law in how much we allow. Even if effectively we can only reduce the abuse slightly through law. It's still a little less intrusive in my pocket.
Your home page flies the flag of New York, where legal sales have still not begun, and possession has been legal only since March 31. Are you saying the situation in New York became what you describe in the course of 3-1/2 months?
2. Politically you're going to be forced to pay for the consequences of use. More intoxicants to choose from, more use, the more the “state” (someone) will reach into your pocket to pay for the consequences.
If legalizing marijuana will increase those problems, and thus should not be done, then criminalizing alcohol would decrease those problems, and thus should be done. Do you support criminalizing alcohol?
No I don’t!
Obviously you didn’t read what I wrote.
We’ve culturally accepted a certain level of societal dysfunctionality with alcohol and we have demonstrated it can’t be changed. We have accepted that to pay tax dollar-wise for the consequences of that dysfunctionality.
Just pointed out increasing a problem doesn’t make it better just more expensive for the taxpayer.
Again I don’t care what you drink, smoke, inject into yourself. It would be great if you could alone bear the consequences of your decision. However politically that’s not to be i have to pay for it & I resent it.
2. Politically you're going to be forced to pay for the consequences of use. More intoxicants to choose from, more use, the more the “state” (someone) will reach into your pocket to pay for the consequences.
If legalizing marijuana will increase those problems, and thus should not be done, then criminalizing alcohol would decrease those problems, and thus should be done. Do you support criminalizing alcohol?
No I don’t!
Why not, since as I showed, the logical corollary of your marijuana argument is that there should be fewer legal intoxicants.
Obviously you didn’t read what I wrote.
Not only did I read it, I noted its logical implication for alcohol policy.
This de facto legalization could not happen outside the context of the hype and expectation surrounding impending legalization and the massive reduction in enforcement encouraged by that hype. Therefore, this period of time must be included when considering the effects of legalization.
Pantywaist dirty bong sludge lipped potheads, and the arch degenerate subversives goading them, on love to ignore this period of time and use the fact that most change happened before de jure legalization to "prove" there was little or no change by legalization. But, as I mentioned, I am immune to pro-pot smoking and vape vaggotry propaganda.
Evidence?
“dirty bong sludge lipped potheads” is going to be the name of my new stoner rock band.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.