The Swamp

I couldn't find one in the search so I guess our last pot thread was in one of ye' olde Swamps. It's high times at Florida Atlantic apparently:

cnnsi.com wrote:Florida Atlantic head coach Carl Pelini and defensive coordinator Pete Rekstis have resigned, effective immediately, the university announced on Wednesday. Offensive coordinator Brian Wright will take over as the Owls interim head coach.

At a press conference on Wednesday, FAU athletic director Pat Chun cited “illegal drug use” as the reason for both coaches’ resignations. Chun found out about an incident on Monday and reported it to the school’s general council. According to Chun, no other football staffers or student-athletes were involved.

Pelini and Rekstis were both escorted out of the team’s football offices by police. Pelini has since apologized in a statement.

There has to be photos or video of them taking some rips. Otherwise, who gives a shit?

Yeah! War on drugs!

Bensell wrote:I couldn't find one in the search so I guess our last pot thread was in one of ye' olde Swamps.

Bump.

I just can't smoke stupid-ass weed in a world in which cocaine and MDMA exist.

Gunpowder wrote:I just can't smoke stupid-ass weed in a world in which cocaine and MDMA exist.

Awesome line, but I'd substitute opium and 'shrooms.

The Sybian wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:I just can't smoke stupid-ass weed in a world in which cocaine and MDMA exist.

Awesome line, but I'd substitute opium and 'shrooms.

You haven't smoked weed lately eh? It's crazy how motherfucking high you get.

Rush2112 wrote:

The Sybian wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:I just can't smoke stupid-ass weed in a world in which cocaine and MDMA exist.

Awesome line, but I'd substitute opium and 'shrooms.

You haven't smoked weed lately eh? It's crazy how motherfucking high you get.

Tried it for the first time in a decade recently. I was lying down within 5 minutes. Paralyzing stuff that a guy with a prescription got from a medical marijuana place. Way too strong...

Rush2112 wrote:

The Sybian wrote:

Gunpowder wrote:I just can't smoke stupid-ass weed in a world in which cocaine and MDMA exist.

Awesome line, but I'd substitute opium and 'shrooms.

You haven't smoked weed lately eh? It's crazy how motherfucking high you get.

That doesn't entice me. I started getting paranoid and paralyzed towards the end of my run.

As someone who's never been a regular consumer, pot smokers fascinate me.

I can't grok the whole cultural experience... fhow dealer connections are made, what it should cost, how much to smoke, why people treat it so differently, etc.

devilfluff wrote:I can't grok the whole cultural experience... fhow dealer connections are made, what it should cost, how much to smoke, why people treat it so differently, etc.

Most dealers are strangers. And most deals are made in strange lands. Weed comes in several varieties; Stinky, Tromp, Kung, Valentine and X being among the more notable.

Scottie wrote: Weed comes in several varieties; Stinky, Tromp, Kung, Valentine and X being among the more notable.

And thus I realize that I am a clueless old man.

Oh, there is more than just a few

http://www.thecliniccolorado.com/strainbook" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Scottie wrote:Weed comes in several varieties; Stinky, Tromp, Kung, Valentine and X being among the more notable.

Is Kush not a thing anymore?

Kush is a thing. Most stuff is strains of crosses which kush is a part of more than a few.

Pound or Dime? Dime, let's smoke it tonight.

Interesting article on Colorado's legalization, and it's effect on pro athletes.

[excerpt]

...And so, there's a stigma. Numerous athletes interviewed for this story, including four Broncos, wouldn't go on the record when asked about their view of legalization. Use of marijuana is believed to be widespread among pro football players. Last year, former Detroit Lions lineman Lomas Brown made news by saying at least 50 percent of NFL players probably smoke marijuana. An ESPN survey this year found that 70 percent of the prospects at the NFL scouting combine admitted to using marijuana in college.

"Yeah, guys smoke marijuana. That's the way it is," said former Nuggets guard Earl Boykins, who said he has never smoked cannabis. "It has nothing to do with the team, or the legality. If you want to smoke, you're going to smoke. If you get caught, you release a statement...

Friday was the day that businesses could go get their permits for selling the legal weed on the 1st of January. According to the article I read in the Post there are 42 places Denver.

Oh, and if anyone is looking for a job, the Post is hi"gh"ring a pot critic.

Rush2112 wrote:Friday was the day that businesses could go get their permits for selling the legal weed on the 1st of January. According to the article I read in the Post there are 42 places Denver.

Oh, and if anyone is looking for a job, the Post is hi"gh"ring a pot critic.

Heard some nonsense on CPR today that boulder county wasn't going live on the 1st :(

Rush2112 wrote:Friday was the day that businesses could go get their permits for selling the legal weed on the 1st of January. According to the article I read in the Post there are 42 places Denver.

Oh, and if anyone is looking for a job, the Post is hi"gh"ring a pot critic.

I was listening to Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me a few weeks ago, and they played a game where you have to guess the caller's job. The caller was the editor of the pot section of the Post.

P.D.X. wrote:
Heard some nonsense on CPR today that boulder county wasn't going live on the 1st :(

Looks like late February at the earliest and more likely March or April

But I think you can still get it through more traditional means.

Rush2112 wrote:

P.D.X. wrote:
Heard some nonsense on CPR today that boulder county wasn't going live on the 1st :(

Looks like late February at the earliest and more likely March or April

But I think you can still get it through more traditional means.

BJ's in an alley. Got it.

Idiotic Maryland Police Chief sites Daily Current story before Senate to argue that pot should not be legalized based on 37 overdoses in Colorado the day it went legal. I get that most people haven't heard of the Daily Current, and for that they are lucky. It is a horrible Onion knockoff that is never funny, and too realistic (at times) to be good satire. I didn't read this post, but they are usually extremely obviously fake stories.

The point, though, is that if this police chief is wrapped up enough in his anti-pot stance that he is testifying before the state senate, you'd think he would know that nobody has ever OD'd from smoking pot. Seriously, what a fucking moran. Then he says that nobody has ever OD'd on beer. Really?

If you haven't heard the pot business is going strong and tax revenues are exceeding expectations. Just Pueblo county is expected to raise 11 million plus in taxes.

Since the US has become a society that puts a price on absolutely everydamnthing, as these facts about tax revenues become known and accepted, game over. At least the financialization of our entire culture isn't all bad.

howard wrote:Since the US has become a society that puts a price on absolutely everydamnthing, as these facts about tax revenues become known and accepted, game over. At least the financialization of our entire culture isn't all bad.

Timothy Leary was all about how much revenue could be had by legalizing and taxing mary jane back when he was running for governor of CA.

Rush2112 wrote:If you haven't heard the pot business is going strong and tax revenues are exceeding expectations. Just Pueblo county is expected to raise 11 million plus in taxes.

Absolutely no surprise there. The two questions I have, how much more difficult, if at all, will it be for underage kids to get pot. When I was in high school, it was easier to get pot than beer. At least safer. I guess by senior year, enough kids had passable IDs and we knew the places that didn't care, so it was pretty easy to get beer. And how will this affect the drug dealers? Will they buy legal pot and sell it to minors, will they continue selling black market pot, maybe for a much cheaper price, will they move on to other illicit drugs or go into a different line of work?

How old do you have to be to buy weed? Is it sold in state run stores, or licensed stores?

Well I know one grower that was pissed it passed as it'll take away his business. As far as getting I think it will be the same as before the law passed. Denver had hundreds of medical places, and it was very easy to get a card. As someone underage I think you'd just go the typical route as the medical/legal weed is quite expensive.

The stores are independent businesses that had to get a special certificate from the state and you can only sell to those 21 and older. My brother in law has gone a few times so I just get a joint or two off him.

But…I don't get it. I wouldn't buy my sushi from a doctor.

Rush2112 wrote:…as if he has a physical addiction, which no one has ever had…

I think I get what you are saying, what you object to. But, the whole concept of 'physical addiction' is flawed and generally inaccurate. Ultimately, all addictions are physical, as all addictions are mediated by brain chemistry. This includes purely behavioral addictions (gambling, sex, even OCD if you want to call those behaviors 'addictions.)

Particularly addiction to any ingested chemical that has a direct interaction with the brain--physical. Physical molecules are interacting with physical receptors or otherwise altering the physical chemistry of the brain.

Historically in general, (gross) physical signs of withdrawal helped define addiction. In many circles, 'physical' withdrawal was the sine qua non of addiction. This is how we wrongly considered cocaine as not addictive, or not 'physically addictive'--you didn't get the shakes, fevers, vomiting or other signs that are typical of withdrawal from alcohol, opiates and other drugs.

Turns out, cocaine withdrawal causes very specific, recognizable physical signs. But these are seen only at the molecular level. We did not have the tools/technology to see the physical signs of cocaine withdrawal until the 1990s.

Classifying some chemicals as 'physically addictive' and others as (only) 'psychologically addictive is useless. It is another way of saying 'we can see the signs of withdrawal with the naked eye', which is not very useful.

WRT weed addiction (as long as I'm dropping experience) I did not think weed was addictive, primarily because I had never met any weed addicts. My friends who smoked habitually were clearly hooked on other stuff in addition to smoking lots of weed. But, then I met people who were weed addicts, when I was in recovery with them. Often I am too dumb to be convinced of something until I see it with my own eyes. It seems to me a significantly smaller percentage of weed smokers end up addicted, compared to even alcohol, but clearly compared to cocaine and to opiates. The percent of casual users, people who can put it down w/o a second thought, is high for some drugs, medium for others, and approaches zero for heroin and smoked concentrated cocaine (crack and freebase.) Weed addicts are a small percentage of weed users, but there are plenty of them.

Also, I have the impression that weed got much more popular starting somewhere in the early 90s. Maybe my impression stems from weed being more visible in the popular culture, particularly in the hip hop breakthrough to its place in pop culture.

Agree Howard. The sentiment has moved too far in favor of legalization. I still think its best to legalize (mostly to decriminalize) but the physical harm of pot has been totally overlooked. Not only in terms of addiction but how is it that cigarette smoke is the worst thing ever for you but marijuana smoke is ok. Weed is potent now and plenty of folks cant stop smoking it. Still remember the idiot that came to my HS trying to tell a student only assembly that pot wasn't addictive. Girl whose brother was a stoner got up and started screaming at the guy and walked out. And she was right.

HaulCitgo wrote:Agree Howard. The sentiment has moved too far in favor of legalization. I still think its best to legalize (mostly to decriminalize) but the physical harm of pot has been totally overlooked. Not only in terms of addiction but how is it that cigarette smoke is the worst thing ever for you but marijuana smoke is ok. Weed is potent now and plenty of folks cant stop smoking it. Still remember the idiot that came to my HS trying to tell a student only assembly that pot wasn't addictive. Girl whose brother was a stoner got up and started screaming at the guy and walked out. And she was right.

Well, a big reason cigarette smoke is bad for you is the additives, and presumably pot has less of that, especially if you were to vaporize, no?

HaulCitgo wrote:Agree Howard. The sentiment has moved too far in favor of legalization. I still think its best to legalize (mostly to decriminalize) but the physical harm of pot has been totally overlooked. Not only in terms of addiction but how is it that cigarette smoke is the worst thing ever for you but marijuana smoke is ok. Weed is potent now and plenty of folks cant stop smoking it. Still remember the idiot that came to my HS trying to tell a student only assembly that pot wasn't addictive. Girl whose brother was a stoner got up and started screaming at the guy and walked out. And she was right.

Ehh, it's so easy to get that there's gonna be hardcore "addicted" smokers whether it's legal or not.

AB_skin_test wrote:

HaulCitgo wrote:Agree Howard. The sentiment has moved too far in favor of legalization. I still think its best to legalize (mostly to decriminalize) but the physical harm of pot has been totally overlooked. Not only in terms of addiction but how is it that cigarette smoke is the worst thing ever for you but marijuana smoke is ok. Weed is potent now and plenty of folks cant stop smoking it. Still remember the idiot that came to my HS trying to tell a student only assembly that pot wasn't addictive. Girl whose brother was a stoner got up and started screaming at the guy and walked out. And she was right.

Well, a big reason cigarette smoke is bad for you is the additives, and presumably pot has less of that, especially if you were to vaporize, no?

That is one reason. How many chemical additives are there in cigs, over 300? Nobody is arguing that marijuana smoke isn't bad for you, but another difference is people smoke a lot more cigarettes than joints/bings/bowls. Plus cigarette smokers, for the most part, smoke everyday. Sure, some pot heads smoke every day, but I wouldn't think most people do. And those who do, aren't going to smoke more because it is legalized.

As for the potency, I have been hearing a lot lately about how strong weed has become what with all of the hydroponic growing and creation of new strains of kind bud. I haven't smoked in a long time, but I don't doubt it. I've also heard that the weed from the 60s and 70s weren't anywhere near as strong as what it was in the 90s.

The Sybian wrote:As for the potency, I have been hearing a lot lately about how strong weed has become what with all of the hydroponic growing and creation of new strains of kind bud. I haven't smoked in a long time, but I don't doubt it. I've also heard that the weed from the 60s and 70s weren't anywhere near as strong as what it was in the 90s.

In my experience, that's very true, Syb. As an old dude who smoked a lot of pot in the 70s and 80s, then it was often a social thing as you shared a joint with friends and didn't get too stoned. I've only smoked on rare occasions in recent years, but holy cow, it is wayyy stronger, nowadays.

HaulCitgo wrote:Agree Howard. The sentiment has moved too far in favor of legalization.

In my post above, I tried to lean hard toward medical fact, to keep my opinion out of what I wrote. IMO, those facts bear little relation to the legalization process.

The ill effects of weed upon individuals and society are tiny in comparison to the legal tobacco and alcohol. My opinion is that weed does far less damage to both individuals and society than high fructose corn syrup.

Plus, imo, far more dangerous chemicals should be legal. Heroin, meth and cocaine. Because the ills of these substances being illegal are so much greater than the ills were they legal. (Both heroin and cocaine were once legal in the US w/o prescription; meth is still legal w/prescription, and given to children for ADD.) My most simple and best argument is this:

C E N S O R D E D off-topic digression

(sorry)

My top argument is this: all these drugs are readily available throughout the nation. Despite the billions spent enforcing the laws. The retort to this fact is "enforcement has failed; thus we need more enforcement, then we will succeed" at interdiction. This approach, more more more, has consistently failed over and over. While compounding the long list of bad effects directly attributable to illegality (cartels, crime, millions of end-users and street dealers in prison.)

I have plenty other arguments. Such as the experience with alcohol being legal, then illegal for fourteen years, then legal again (in brief: high crime, essentially unchanged rates of alcoholism across those time frames.)

This was my dumb opinion (although backed with facts, but through my interpretation.) Earlier post, I tried for fact only.

Potency is a significant factor.

What is the difference between snorted cocaine powder and smoked concentrated cocaine? Potency; the speed and concentration of active drug that reaches your brain. I do not think this is definitely proven yet, but it is a logical inference that higher potency is likely related to higher rates of addiction. It is clear that the addiction rate for users of snorted powder was (back in the day) lower than for crack/freebase smokers.

I am not super current with the state of research into this question. This line of thought/theory/approach has been accepted by many in the field over the past couple of decades, with data to support. But as far as I know, not yet universally accepted, proven or refuted. There is also data that opposes this line.