If marijuana is fully legalized, a new industry will be born.

[Writer]

Quickly, companies will step in to package and market marijuana cigarettes. There's also the likelihood that a corporation would form from the expanding marijuana market. This would become a heavily capitalist enterprise.

My question is: Good, bad, or ugly? Would marijuana become a sell-out product for the market? Would it still carry the same anti-establishment mystique?

Do you even agree that we would see the commodification of marijuana products? Or would there be something "special" about legalized marijuana that would make it immune to capitalist forces?

[NightWatcher]

1. imagine the secondary markets that would come out. Hemp, snack foods, pot food mixes

Cosmic Brownies anyone?

I think it would be a huge boom. Have you seen what craft beers have done to the beer market? Imagine craft pot....

[havocmom]

98. designer bongs for the artsy-fartsy

We could put it into beer and destroy the country music industry in a couple of months.

[Warpy]

2. Rolling joints isn't the only operation

Bongs, roach clips, vaporizers, gourmet loaded food items, a resurgence in black lights and day glo posters, the mind boggles at the money to be made by legalizing pot.

[NightWatcher]

6. the first state to legalize it will see a boom in Pot Tourism as well

then a week after they report their tax revenues a ton of other states will jump on the bandwagon and legalize it, tax it, and publicize it.

Imagine...... California opens new Marijuana Amusement Park



Attendance tops 1 million the first month

[Romulox]

8. Bongs, roach clips, vaporizers--all legal and widely available in most states.

:hi:

[rudy23]

84. I think it'd be even more boggled to see how much is made by keeping it illegal

I don't know for sure, but I bet the whole thing would be pretty mind-boggling if we could see the numbers.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

3. I can purchase alcohol from boutique wineries/distilleries...

why not weed?

[Romulox]

4. Right, but others stand to lose EVERYTHING--

Do you realize how many podunk police departments fund themselves through drug forfeitures (which are, incidentally, "in rem" actions against the property, and as you may be aware, property has no due process rights)?

Not to mention all the for profit prisons teeming with relatively easy to manage non-violent offenders.

Can you imagine how dangerous policing (and for that matter, running a prison) would be if they were dealing with violent people all day? And to top it all off, you want to take away their seizure monies? Expect major opposition from these two industries, among others.

[90-percent]

5. Corporate dope

This will be fun to see corporations monopolize the whole thing to maximize profits.

I cannot wait for the TV commercials!

-90% Jimmy

[Romulox]

7. How can they "monopolize" anything (except with the help of the Congress)

If it's legal, it's available at every farmer's market.

[90-percent]

10. Follow the money

It's mere speculation on my part, but given the past history of corporate behavior, I think they'll find a way. Like they always have throughout American history!

-90% Jimmy

[Robb]

18. Ask anyone who grows corn on a small scale. nt

[Romulox]

25. Not sure how to take that. Here in Michigan, corn grows abundantly.

And is easy to get at mom & pop roadside type affairs and farmer's markets.

If it's legal, it's trivial to grow. The liquor analogy isn't apt, because it's not difficult, expensive, or dangerous to produce pot like it is liquor.

[Robb]

28. Oh, sure.

I just meant that agribusiness has a near-monopoly on corn. It's trivial to grow corn, but the $$ involved outside of the big guys is similarly trivial.

[Ganja Ninja]

90. They don't sell tobacco and liquor in farmer's markets.

And of course congress will give corporations all the help they can pay them for. So don't expect to see pot for sale in anything other than licensed and approved form complete with tax stamps on it just like tobacco. It's reality I'm sorry to say.

[Romulox]

101. Tobacco is much harder to produce than pot. Same is true for liquor...

Pot will grow in all 50 states, just to get the ball rolling. Not so with tobacco. Pot requires no dangerous still to produce.

That is not to say that Congress won't try to regulate it like tobacco. But they simply won't be able to....

"So don't expect to see pot for sale in anything other than licensed and approved form complete with tax stamps on it just like tobacco."

(looks around for tax stamps)...ummmm. :hide:

I guess my argument is that if it is legal to possess pot, they can make it illegal to grow it too, but it will be a losing battle.

[Ganja Ninja]

106. Tax Stamps on the top of a pack like this

[Romulox]

119. That's actually NOT what a tax stamp on cigarettes looks like...

Again, pot is available NOW without a tax stamp. :hi:

[eShirl]

13. "I cannot wait for the TV commercials!"

You've Come a Long Way, Doobie.

[MicaelS]

9. You're missing a POV....It all depends on how it would be legalized....

Would it treated as beer and wine, or as hard liquor? If beer / wine then it could be sold many places, and you would be able to grow a small amount for your own consumption without too many rules. Like hard liquor, then it would be very strictly regulated, and governments would take their cut in the form of Tax Stamps. There were many onerous rules, regulations and the cost of the Stamp would be high. You might not be able to grow your own at all. Some states only would allow its sale in designated state stores, run by the state.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

11. The "anti-establishment" mystique has been gone for some time now.........

I would say that for most open-minded folks, pot use has been a pretty mundane thing for a while. Its only the LE folks and those who will either lose $$ because of legalization, or see some fictitious societal peril that are still freaking out about it.

I would hate to see pot legalized for capital gains. I surely don't want to see big corporations being the sole providers of weed that will be the leafy equivalent of Budweiser. Let us grow and leave us alone.

edit: I want to say, legalization WILL happen. It may not be the way we envision or want it, but it WILL happen. The tide has turned against the prohibitionists.

[JVS]

34. "leafy equivalent of Budweiser" would suck; leafy equivalent of Steel Reserve malt liquor would RULE

[Romulox]

52. I'm not looking for leaf; I'm interested in flowers! nt

[arcadian]

12. Bad: They would pump it full of additives and chemicals.

[chimpymustgo]

14. The American way. Love the idea of the Weed theme parks!

[Jamastiene]

15. Seeds

Seeds make all the difference in the world. They can try to regulate who can own seeds, but there will always be a black market and seeds will be the part they will leave "against the law." I can guarantee that if is is made legal anywhere, they will make sure to limit the seeds available and still try to control it.

Marijuana should NOT be illegal in the first place. Mother Nature intended for it to exist. It is there for a reason. Imagine if tomatoes were outlawed and they later decriminalized tomatoes...The seeds would still be outlawed. The whole idea of outlawing part of nature is a crock of shit from the beginning.

[Craftsman]

16. Not to mention the cheetos consumption will shoot throught the roof

[Jamastiene]

26. Another industry that could be saved in the revitalization

of our economy through removing a silly outlaw on something that is completely natural.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. There is already an industry

There are counties in this country that would collapse without marijuana growing, and even those not involved in any way are aware of this fact. It is a billion dollar enterprise at this time, with all manner of support businesses around it.
So this 'if, then' premise is silly. Also silly, the notion that marijuana has an 'anti establishment' mystic at all, or that anyone uses it because they think it does. The last 3 Presidents of the United States have each said they have smoked pot. The Governor of CA, a Republican, as well. Most of my work superiors, people who make huge amounts of money, have smoked regularly. My boss has asked me to smoke before certain sorts of work. So how is this anti establishment? My boss, my governor and my President have all used pot for fun. In my life experience, marijuana is part of the establishment.
I really have not heard about 'the establishment' outside of period films for many many years. An interesting phrase. An antique if ever there was one. This is not 1968. There already is a huge marijuana industry. It is in fact, established.
So what is your actual point?

[MindPilot]

19. The bong, pipe and clip market is already pretty well locked up by India

But I think you will see much more in the way of food items and coffee/pot shops.

My concern with the food items is twofold. The effect of eating pot can be much more profound than from smoking, it's a very different high, and it can take anywhere from 30 to 90 minutes to hit. There have been times I've eaten a brownie and an hour later been very grateful I was close to the couch. Really I had no idea there was such a thing as "too high" until I tried edibles.

Someone will go to a restaurant, have some pot cheesecake for dessert and then the full effect will hit them on the drive home.

The other thing is that at some point someone is going to accidentally leave that pot-laced rice krispy treat out for the kid to find and...

[gels]

20. I had a 'discussion' with a fundie about this

and of course, he had to throw religion into it(surprise). I then suggested to him, what if pot is God's ultimate sacrament? After all, wine and bread are all man-made, but pot grows freely(so to speak).What if it was His divine will to utilize this plant as we have corn, tomatoes etc. He just glazed over and walked away muttering to himself. Man, they hate it when you out logic them

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Genesis 1:29

"And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed."
Every herb yielding seed. No exceptions.

[Romulox]

27. I'd add Mark 7:14

14And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:

15There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

[Sebastian Doyle]

50. And let's not forget this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jan/06/science.religion

That whole "anointing with oil" thing that JC and His posse did? It wasn't Crisco.....

[Jkid]

21. It Depends

I think that state legislatures will regulate weed just as cigarettes. But due to the stigma of controlled substances, it will take a while before any corporation monetizes weed.

[eShirl]

29. I would bet Big Tobacco will be ready to go 8 o'clock, Day One.

[tridim]

38. Considering it takes a minimum of 60 days to grow a plant..

How is that possible without them breaking the law 60 days previous?

[eShirl]

62. it's an expression

a quote from Time Bandits

"If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!"

[jmowreader]

66. Here's how...

We'll use the example of alcohol prohibition. The 18th Amendment to the Constitution banned the sale, manufacture, transport, import or export of intoxicating beverages in the United States. What it did NOT do was specify what an intoxicating beverage was. That was done by the Volstead Act, which set "intoxicating" at anything over 0.5 percent.

FDR ran for office on a "wet" platform--abolishing Prohibition. His coattails pulled enough wets into Congress that they were able to redefine "intoxicating" as anything over 3.2 percent. The law was signed in March. It set the date for legalization of 3.2 beer as April 7--long enough to brew, package and ship beer. They could have just raised the alcohol percentage to five and imported Molson until the American brewers were back on line, but one of Roosevelt's motivations was to increase employment in the US and you can't do that by importing Canadian beer.

That, I think, is what they'd have to do here. Obviously they wouldn't HAVE to--there is enough marijuana growing in the United States right now that if they suddenly legalized pot there would be enough to meet demand. But to maintain the fallacy that no one grows weed in America because it's illegal to do it, and to give the states time to adjust to the new reality (for one thing, they'd want to figure out a way to regulate a head shop since, after all, there's no way you could EVER apply the laws governing tobacco or liquor sales to marijuana sales--yes, I'm being facetious), three months between the time the bill was ratified and the time pot was legal is about what you want.

[jmowreader]

61. Existing corporations will be reticent to, so new corporations will

[devilgrrl]

22. Why isn't industrial Hemp ever brought up in these discussions?

Paper, fabric, fuel, and can't get high from it?

[Jamastiene]

31. It kills me that they won't even allow that. n/t

[Historic NY]

24. Smokeless marihuana?

[Romulox]

32. It's called a vaporizer.

A vaporizer (or vapouriser) is a device, or in some cases a modular "system" of assembled "vaporization tools," used to extract and deliver via inhalation the active ingredients of plant material, commonly cannabis, tobacco, or any of many other herbs or blends (phyto-inhalation; see also: aromatherapy). Vaporization is an alternative to smoking. Rather than burning the herb, which produces irritating, toxic, and carcinogenic by-products, a vaporizer heats the material in a partial vacuum so that the active compounds contained in the plant boil off into a vapor. No combustion occurs, so no smoke or taste of smoke is evident.

This fellow seems to be enjoying it!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporizer

[CrownPrinceBandar]

91. They are the shit.............

[librechik]

105. had one--couldn't ever tell if it was working

I'm a hard case, I guess

[Subdivisions]

30. Legalize hemp. n/t

[endless october]

33. legalize it.

corporations or no.

[tridim]

35. There will be Budweisers and fine-wines in the legal cannabis industry

It's fascinating watching the MMJ industry mature here in Denver. Some dispensaries understand quality and they will survive, but most don't. The dispensaries that don't will fail quickly and RJR will be right there to take their business.

[Sebastian Doyle]

53. Well, just like with beer

I'd opt for the "microgrowery" kind over the "BUDweiser"

[tridim]

58. Yep, I think lots of people feel the same way.

IMO current underground growers know a hell of a lot more about the craft than RJR does. It will become very evident if/when legalization happens. The microgrowery (nice term btw) industry will be huge.

[uncle ray]

59. has one opened on your street yet?

they are popping up everywhere, even down here in the springs. there's one a few blocks from my house, all kinds of people are getting their cards, where i work, a full 10% of our staff are legal patients, one guy i worked with has quit to grow and more are set to follow. right now it appears the bandwagon is making it's trip through town.

it seems watching the scene here in colorado, and other legal states, that Big Tobacco doesn't seem to be taking much of an interest yet in getting into the cannabis industry. there's gotta be a reason, they don't even seem to be donating money behind the scenes. i suspect it's because to grow GOOD cannabis, it takes skill and commitment, possibly much more than tobacco. there are very few tobacco connoisseurs compared to pot connoisseurs. most people in the legal pot business want good pot cheap and widely available, as opposed to those illegal growers and sellers who want to keep the prices inflated. the prices will come down with time as more growers ramp up their operations, and it will just not be all that profitable. don't get me wrong, there will always be good money to be made, but it's not "easy money", you'll still have to work your ass off to make a good living growing.

one interesting business that has recently opened in colorado does testing of your crop or a small sample. they test THC and CBN levels, as well as adulterants and who knows what else. they will certify your entire crops quality. they apparently working on documenting the genetic fingerprints of the various strains and cataloging a database of strains too, to certify strains. these jobs are not exactly minimum wage jobs, these are skilled people using scientific equipment i don't know the names of. like tridem said, it's interesting watching the industry mature.

[tridim]

63. There are a few dispensaries close by, but not on my street..

because I live too close to a school.

I'm a legal patient and caregiver BTW, just in case agent Mike is monitoring. :)

[tinrobot]

36. Imagine RJ Reynolds selling pot like cigarettes

Not my idea of a good thing.

[toadzilla]

40. they'd pump it full of addictive chemicals and poison

and before you knew it, everything bad ever said about smoking pot would suddenly become true. addiction, cancer, ect..

[Bertha Venation]

37. Imagine how much municipalities would save on enforcing

such silly laws.

[Bennyboy]

39. Corporatization of another "product"...

Not sure I am all for legalization. Seems to me instead of the illegals growing, then Con Agra or Monsanto will be. And GMO'ing.

[Gman2]

41. People, you arent getting it. We have NO test for present level of intoxication.

Until then, they cannot allow it legal.

[tridim]

45. There's no test for nicotine intoxication either.

Yet cigarettes are quite legal.

[Gman2]

47. WHile they might make you sick, they dont stone you.

[tridim]

48. There is definitely a buzz created by nicotine.

That's the legal definition of intoxication.

Who gets to decide which types of intoxication are okay and which are evil? The government?

[Gman2]

51. Furthermore, cigs are grandfathered in. Like booze.

[krabigirl]

49. ? so what?

[Gman2]

57. So, how to patrol for safety? How NOT to falsely imprison after accident.

As a med marijuana patient, I take my freedom and my life into my hands when I drive. If some fool jumps out in front of me, and I kill him, I am going away. Why? Cuz they will do any number of tests that will determine I use, as long ago as two months. Murder, or manslaughter. That is not cool. And law enforcement will not allow only field sobriety to convict, or raise revenue. It is too lengthy a court battle. COST. We NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED a test. Simple.

[ShortnFiery]

118. Here ya go: If you've had too much, you may drive TOO SLOW or leave your head lights off

when you get into your car at night-time. :eyes:

Most people use "common sense." I saw someone driving 25 MPH years ago on the highway and jumped to the conclusion that they were SMOKING WEED when, in fact, they were DIALING THEIR CELL PHONE. :(

You can die of Nicotine Poisoning too but FEW have. :shrug:

[Romulox]

56. LOL. If you can't tell if someone's impaired by their behavior, then WHO CARES?

And they call pot smokers paranoid. :hi:

[Gman2]

64. DUDE, my pot doc told me to buy two marinol tabs for just that purpose.

To not be hauled off on murder. Dont be an idiot.

[Romulox]

65. So...logic, coherence aren't strong suits for you, huh?

What in god's name does your response have to do with anything? A cop isn't a doctor. Stop pretending that you know anything about pharmacology, medicine. :hi:

edit: also, for someone who represents himself as LEO, your response betrays a woeful ignorance of the law. :wow: Willful intoxication is a defense to no crime. :hi:

[Gman2]

68. I know about the law. And the law says, you can be tried for murder and manslaughter

for killing someone with the breakdown components of months old pot. That is FACT. I dont need to be superhuman.

[Romulox]

72. "killing someone with the breakdown components of months old pot"

WTF does this mean? :wtf:

I repeat: Willful intoxication is NOT a defense to ANY crime.

[Gman2]

80. I'll dumb this down for ya. If pot, harsh charges, if not, likely skate free.

[Romulox]

82. See below. Your posts do not reflect an accurate understanding of the law. nt

[Gman2]

70. LEO, MEEEEEE. Pshaw. I am a mar med patient.

[Romulox]

76. Right. A med mar patient that doesn't know ANYTHING about pot?

And is named "Gman2".

And talks like a cop. :hi:

[Gman2]

79. I am a grower, and know more than you forgot. Silly.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

112. you are totally incoherent now

Just dig yourself deeper, please. Keep on going!

[CBGLuthier]

114. and claims to be a grower on an open forum?

actually maybe he is a black market grower. The black market has ZERO interest in legalization.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

113. "Pshaw"??? Are you 200 years old?

Because that might explain the ignorance, illogic and incoherence behind your posts.

[Gman2]

71. You dont seem to get it. Marinol is a defense to having its breakdown components

in your system. If you fail a pot employment test, the first question they ask is, DO YOU HAVE A PRESCRIPTION FOR MARINOL? You will fail in your attempt to paint me odd.

[Romulox]

74. What business is it of yours what components of ANYTHING I have in my system?

You get to observe my driving on public roadways. Not my urine. I will say for a third time: Willful intoxication is not a defense to ANY crime.

So, pray tell, what business is it of yours, a "Law Enforcement Officer", to be following me to the toilet to examine for "breakdown components" (is this a technical term? :rofl: )

Answer: it isn't. If you didn't observe me breaking a law, you have no business knowing what "breakdown components" are in my body. Do I need to repeat for a fourth time that willful intoxication is a defense to no crime? Nor is it a factor that mitigates the intent needed for a 1st or 2nd degree murder conviction vs. a manslaughter.

You aren't a doctor. You aren't a lawyer. There's a reason those two go to school for an aggregate of 15+ years. :hi:

[Gman2]

77. So, you are NOT aware, that pot use, posthumously, can land you in prison?

If you planned a robbery, and all agreed to NOT bring guns, and one did, will you NOT be charged with having had a gun used in the commision of a crime? It is not an excuse for a crime. It is a lozenge, against mandatory minimums, and glommed on sentences. If you werent so pompous, I could teach you more than most docs, lawyers and Leo's. I've been thru it.

[Romulox]

81. "Posthumous" means after death.

"It is a lozenge, against mandatory minimums, and glommed on sentences. If you werent so pompous, I could teach you more than most docs, lawyers and Leo's. I've been thru it."

If you want to speak about the law, you must speak precisely and without appeal to too many loose analogies (e.g. "a lozenge".)

What you seem to be saying is that the presence of marijuana in one's system can be used to secure a conviction for negligent homicide in a situation in which the behavior engaged in was not otherwise reckless and in disregard of human safety to begin with. I've never heard of such a case.

"I've been thru it."

If you mean you've killed someone with your automobile and were convicted of manslaughter ("negligent homicide") , and, further, that the only factor in your behavior proven to be "reckless" or "negligent" was the dormant THC stored in your fat cells, I simply call bullshit. I don't believe you. :hi:

[Gman2]

85. posthumous, means after the fact. not death. You are young arent you?

[Romulox]

88. Yeah, uh...it's been nice chatting with you...Professor...

posthumous
One entry found.

Main Entry: post·hu·mous
Pronunciation: \ˈpäs-chə-məs also -tə-, -tyə-, -thə-; päst-ˈhyü-məs, ˈpōst-, -ˈyü-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin posthumus, alteration of postumus late-born, posthumous, from superl. of posterus coming after — more at posterior
Date: 1619

1 : born after the death of the father
2 : published after the death of the author
3 : following or occurring after death <posthumous fame>

— post·hu·mous·ly adverb

— post·hu·mous·ness noun

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/posthumous

Perhaps you are thinking of "post hoc"?

post hoc
2 entries found.

1. post hoc (adjective)
2. post hoc, ergo propter hoc (foreign term)


Main Entry: post hoc
Pronunciation: \ˈpōst-ˈhäk\
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin post hoc, ergo propter hoc after this, therefore because of this
Date: 1704

1 : relating to or being the fallacy of arguing from temporal sequence to a causal relation
2 : formulated after the fact <a post hoc rationalization>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/post%20hoc

:hi:

[Gman2]

92. You arent as bright as you think! Here's why!

Postumus was largely used with respect to events occurring after death but not exclusively so, since the word was simply one of the superlative forms of the adverb post, "subsequently, afterward." Because of its use in connection with death, however, later Latin writers decided that the last part of the word must have to do with humus, "earth," or humre, "to bury," and began spelling the word posthumus.

[Romulox]

96. Not being able to admit a plain error is not endearing. The best thing to do is admit mistake

then move on...

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

109. Hilarious

You have no clue how badly you come off from this exchange, do you?

You're another fine example of the arrogance and ignorance of the forces of prohibition. Keep up the good work, clown. You make a fine poster child for your cause.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

73. Why can't you just test for impairment like they already do?.................

You know, walk the straight line, follow the light and count backward from 100 using multiples of 7. Why do we need some metabolite present to justify arrest? As a MM patient yourself, you should already know that anything that tests MJ metabolites will be useless.

[Gman2]

78. Money. It costs far more to convict on observations.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

87. Revenue which could be introduced by legal weed.........

Q.E.D.

[Flaneur]

103. Dude! Step away from the bong.

Your posts on this thread are teetering toward absolute incoherence.

[Romulox]

83. It's because pot doesn't impair motor skills. (Somehting of a "they walk among us!" scenario). nt

[Gman2]

86. That is silly. Many are inmpaired. You obviously suffer tolerance.

[Romulox]

95. "suffer" my ass! Anyhoo, film the reckless driving on the dash cam (it's already a crime)

:hi:

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

110. what total ignorance and arrogance!

It helps if you can spell "impaired" correctly, most particularly after your pathetic attempt at a lesson in etymology a few posts previously!

Seriously, do you have any idea how f**king stupid you sound on this issue? You are clueless...and it would be kinda funny if the world wasn't filled others just like you.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

89. I disagree..........

Especially when eaten. I'm pretty much useless (motor-coordination wise) after a couple of brownies and I know to stay off the roads. YMMV. My point is that testing for metabolites is useless as THC can stay in the body for over a month, so testing for impairment is pretty much the only avenue left.

[Gman2]

93. UNTIL A TEST IS DEVELOPED!

[CrownPrinceBandar]

99. No need to shout dude...........

Please don't mistake me, I want pot legal. That also means that I would like it to be as hassle-free as we can make it. I agree that a cut-and-dried impairment exam needs to be developed. But until then, can we not go forward with standard, already on the ground impairment tests? I would argue there are already a fair amount of tokers on the road and keeping it criminal will not alleviate that issue. Why not legalize and use that revenue to fund not just impairment testing, but all sorts of studies exploring the uses of the plant?

[Gman2]

100. It's got to be warm and fuzzy for the non-smokers. And judges, ACLU etc!

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

111. total incoherence

Are you G. Gordon Liddy? I mean, you have about the same intellectual approach....

[Romulox]

94. Well, even conceding your point, we still arrive at a non-issue.

If you are debilitated after eating brownies (and I agree that eating the stuff produces a different result,) then surely the conventional indicators of intoxication are sufficient.

After all, driving recklessly while sober is also a violation. Our gman would have us believe that no conviction can be secured save if the person has pot stored in his fat cells. A bizarre contention, when unpacked.

[Gman2]

97. I am saying you will nab few. While I and you might think that peachey,

many that are frightened of drug crazed battering rams wont think so. I am about all the people, not just me.

[bridgit]

42. Long term good, not good yet and the ugly has got to go: Two in jail, one dead after home robbery

Two in jail, one dead after home robbery

Victim chased after invaders

Two men are jailed and a third is dead after a home invasion robbery, possibly seeking marijuana, turned into a fatal highway car chase.

At about 10 a.m. Saturday, two masked men wearing black police type uniforms entered a home on the 12000 block of Tobacco Road in the North San Juan area of Nevada County and allegedly tied up the three men and one woman inside.

The suspects, later identified as Timothy Daniel Fitzpatrick, 43, of Elk Grove, and Terry A. McLeod, 51, of Sacramento, allegedly used metal handcuffs and plastic zip ties to bind the victims, who range in age from 25 to 34.

Fitzpatrick and McLeod then took the victims’ cell phones, IDs, computer equipment and a camera and left in a white Ford F250 pickup truck, according to Nevada County Sheriff Keith Royal.

One of the victims, Christopher T. Teachout, 32, of North San Juan, was able to free himself from his zip tie constraints and chased after the two suspects in his red pick up truck.

The two cars sped southbound down Highway 49. According to Royal, early indications have led investigators to believe that Teachout tried several times to ram the suspect’s truck. At the same time, investigators believe that Fitzpatrick and McLeod fired several shots at Teachout.

The pursuit ended when Fitzpatrick lost control of his truck and crashed into a tree on the side of the highway near Sauer Lane.

http://auburnjournal.com/detail/138874.html

Commodification of products is chugging right along

Medical-marijuana food moves far beyond brownies

DENVER • Any slacker living over his parents’ garage can make pot brownies. Gourmet chefs are taking the art of cooking with marijuana to a higher level.

In Denver, a new medical-marijuana shop called Ganja Gourmet serves cannabis-infused specialties such as pizza, hummus and lasagna. Across town, a Caribbean restaurant plans to offer classes on making meals with pot in every dish.

And in Southern California, a low-budget TV show called “Cannabis Planet” has won fans with a cooking segment showing viewers how to use weed in teriyaki chicken, shrimp capellini and steak sandwiches.

The evolution of pot cooking was perhaps inevitable given the explosion of medical marijuana around the country in recent years. Many health-conscious patients would rather eat the drug than smoke it. And they would prefer to eat something other than sugary treats.

http://www.gazette.com/articles/medical-91118-beyond-moves.html

The intellectual discussion will go forward remaining where able; unable to recognize the scent of rubber coming up off the road. And some things are for the best. Though as the substance tries to interface with legitimate consumers; it is and will continue to be tasked by unlawful elements unable themselves to bring the required levels of - in some cases: university levels of horticulture to bear - that would have already freed most from mystiques that play into anti-establishment thinking

[ShortnFiery]

117. I don't blame theft on MARIJUANA. Exponentially more theft has been conducted for

ALCOHOL seeking behavior than the false state of "reefer madness."



Get real - there's not compelling evidence to link THC to even physiologic addiction. Psychologically speaking, however, one could become addicted to something as inane as PopTarts. :crazy:

[bridgit]

121. Your thinking is very limited on this, and very dangerous for other people - how convenient...

And I think it is the kind of thinking that becomes most easily dismissed by way of it's lazy attitudes toward very serious matters; clearly very serious indeed. The story to which it would seem you are responding is not just some kiddie-like nee-ner nee-ner fucking shit, neither is it thus in spite of your, "Hi! I'm ShortnFiery!! I'm DU's ultimate cage fighter in my own mind!" but instead rather something more like,

"Oooh, ShortnFiery knows evi-ting day-is to know bout dis stuff cause they're all like Reeeefer Mm-mm-mm-mmmmAadnesss!! And they have a jpeg to prove it!"

Do you have any idea how much comes off a mature, medicinally certified plant in terms of cultivated poundage? Are you able to extrapolate that number out front by some 30-35 such plants between 3-5 growers? Just 3-5 growers? All tied in with a network of other such growers positing their produce centrally, for legal authorized distribution? If in the event you are able to muster the kind of forethought being suggested here - are you then able to provide a plan for the protection of this product, and the people that produce it? Or is it your intent to show these violently pernicious criminal elements come for your product: a jpeg of Bud Green when the accumulation of such quantities become economically inviting to criminal elements that may not even smoke marijuana but prefer crack cocaine instead - or ingest *no* other such mind altering substances accept for the green of the money that circulates through and all around the product - but tying then *your* family and friends up and macing everyone under the duct taped hoods round their sobbing necks in a most deadly false pretense with locked & loaded weaponry pushing down into *your* spine?

No. You get fucking real. And grow up in the process :silly: Or better yet have a puff, a bag of Cheeto's, and a Big Gulp of Mountain Dew but then call it a day cause there are serious people out here trying to factor all these disparate elements into a piece of balanced, level-headed legislation the opposition to which is trying every bit as mightily to never see come to a vote while others that do not know shit from Shinola nibble round the edges like sucker-fish, so, you know...

While your getting real and growing up do bear in mind that Reefer Madness is like so 1936...and this is 2010

[msedano]

43. lucky strike packs of happy smoke

back in the day, 1969/70, i visited the Itaewon ville outside the 8th US Army Hq in Seoul. The street corner slicky boys sold weed packed exactly like Lucky Strike cigarettes, lacking only the red dot logo and cellophane wrapper. For five MPC. I have seen the future and it is good.

Speaking of Korea in the 70s...

http://labloga.blogspot.com/2009/12/review-martin-limon-gi-bones.html

recommended.

mvs

[MindPilot]

46. I remember we had these little rolling machines called "Laredo"

The papers were a tube with a filter that looked exactly like an ordinary cigarette. We would literally walk around on base smoking them.

It was a very different military back then...:wow:

[Romulox]

55. L.S.M.F.M. ! nt

[era veteran]

120. Black Afghan Gold Stamp Hashish @ 65 cents a gram In shit park

Frankfurt FRG in 1973. The immigrant Turks controlled the business pretty much. At the Rock, Ayers Kaserne, post price $1.00 gram. Stateside great Columbian gold less than $40.00 a lid. Then the WAR ON DRUGS price of weed went way up, Cocaine way down. With the price of muggles up the violence and thugs came in to the pot world. Two of the DARE instructors, cops, got busted in my town, Lex. KY. ( I have heard DARE described as Drugs are Real Expensive) Fuck the corporations, buy local. Since I am ranting anyway: I have busted the police smoking pot at a local hotel I was managing, I had report of smoking in a non smoking suite. Door open I come in , inform them it was a non smoking room, confiscate the joint filled ashtray and walk out of the room. They didn't say shit either. Later I smoked their cop weed, and the saying that cops have the best weed is close to the mark. Long Point....Anti pot laws are ludicrous, ineffectual, and ANTI AMERICAN! Peace, Richard

[backscatter712]

44. It'd be an improvement over the current illegal industry.

We're moving the cultivation, packaging, distribution and sales of marijuana from sketchy criminal organizations that frequently settle disputes with violence to legitimate businesses, which may or may not be motivated to provide a quality product, but are subject to regulation.

It's the difference between the current alcoholic beverage industry (which makes many tasty drinks) and the Prohibition-era gangs that gave us bathtub gin and methanol moonshine, along with the Valentines Day Massacre.

[MellowDem]

54. And all those "quitting" companies nt

[madokie]

60. That would be a dream of mine come true

so many good products can be made from the hemp plant that they should legalize pot so they could use the hemp plant. Hell henry ford built 'a' (as in one) hemp ford sedan back in the early to mid 30's. I have some shorts made with hemp cloth that is the most comfortable things I've ever worn. I love 'm. Nothing like a real hemp rope either, nothing.

[AngryAmish]

67. Doritos sales skyrocket....

[Gregorian]

69. And what will happen to people who grow it?

The war will never end.

I think if you try to grow tobacco you can get into trouble. I've only heard that. But my guess is Blackwater will be prowling every neighborhood looking for growers when it's "legal".

[tridim]

102. You can legally grow tobacco and brew your own beer.

Most people don't grow tobacco because it's difficult to cure without a climate-controlled, dedicated curing room.

[cherokeeprogressive]

75. The furniture industry will benefit in spades.

We'll need a bazillion new couches to replace the ones worn out by video game players.

[blueworld]

104. I can't think of anything immune to capitalist forces including death

1. If a consumer wants access to it, the government will want to tax & regulate it for their own good, and the small, independent companies that produce it will ultimately sell out or be bought out by bigger fish.

2. The FDA will insist on FSC paper (to protect lives), distilled water in the bongs (to protect lungs) , filters on non-organic weed (yadda yadda)...once it's legalized, accessible & taxed (state & Fed), the narco-nazis will transition from tobacco to weed. Like magic.

"Your FSC paper second-hand smoke is killing me. I can't stand the smell! You're driving up my medical bills & making me high against my will! You're corrupting my children. The smoke is ruining my curtains. It makes you eat & get fat".

Yeah, I can't wait to see how this plays out AFTER it's legalized & taxed. Anti-establishment my Aunt Minnie.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

107. it will be a "tomato" model

Americans grow more tomatoes at home every year than are grown for purchase but there is still a vibrant commercial market for the fruit as well. I suspect it might be quite similar.

[dysfunctional press]

108. what makes you think so?

there are a lot of liability issues that any company considering such a product would have to take into account.
and why would it be cigarettes? why not boxes of brownie mix?

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

115. Four Words....

Allman Brothers Reunion Tour!

[ShortnFiery]

116. Hey Now! Grateful Dead Concerts Across The Nation ...

:smoke: :loveya:



http://s0.ilike.com/play#Grateful+Dead:Truckin%5C%27:10346:s557514.12013924.2293942.0.2.157%2Cstd_0e7c32f9a78c41f59428d3077fb793e4