Yes. I think the current legal marijuana is much more potent than most of the black market marijuana before legalization.

Alcohol and prescription drugs have nothing to do with legalizing marijuana. If you have the measles and chickenpox, intentionally adding herpes does not seem like a reasonable solution to the other two problems.

I gotta side with the pathological liar here. There are so many weed products you won't believe it. How about some 420 hotsauce? Get high with nachos. Or how about some forbidden valley ranch? Popcorn, potroot beer? Or the gummy worms and rings. You can't smell anything from those products (so I've read online);) But you'll get pretty high and won't smell of pot and nobody will even be able to tell the person is baked if they do this alot and act the same.

But fint is wrong about how potent it is sure in the past it was 1% and the average weed today is around 12%. Probably the highest THC around in pot is around 26% in the flowers. You can only get so high smoking that stuff and you can't OD and die. You can eat a ton of weed cookies and get too high but all that will happen is you might have a panic attack or fall asleep.

You may have know whom to ask...but if they thought you might be a "narc" you would not have succeeded in making the purchase.

I could not find someone in a week. I could not buy marijuana in my neighborhood or at work if my life depended on it.

No. History shows us that prohibition did reduce drinking and it was corroborated by incidence of liver disease which is similar regardless if the alcohol consumed is legal or not.

Not true to my knowledge. As I mentioned before, potency was up already...significantly. You think this because data you've seen? Personal experience?

I have some experience in this matter...my senior year in HS =
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1515005160.jpg


Your analogy is only somewhat compelling because it lacks consistency. If the problem is addiction and abuse (I think it is), then we need to recognize that criminalization is not the answer. History proves that.

You are must be a secret pot head who knows this from personal experience or you're basing your non experience based on lies you make up. The crap from humbolt country could be smelt thru triple bragging and that flower was just as potent as what is out there today. My friend worked with people in Cali and they called the stuff 'clown' because after 1 hit they couldn't remember their first names at all.

The stuff was potent back in the day if you knew the right people but most didn't and smoke Mexican brown that was smuggled out of Mexico.

Why don't you drop a load in a ziplock bag and ask if your wife can smell it thru 1 or even 20 bags? You're so full of **** it would likely be chemical weapon and she'd need an NBC suit to try that.

Cool that you went out looking for drugs to take. Admitting that is a good step forward. Do you happen to sport a cop mustache and have a conservative hair cut? Some people can spot a narc a mile away.

Fint is not explaining that potency is a direct causation from the drug wars from the past 50 years.

Sentencing guidelines on personal possession was/is based on weight.
So smugglers can bring in something worth ten times more but will receive the same sentence from the law if caught.
Which haul will the smugglers choose?
That's a no-brainer. Right?
That is what created the crack cocaine epidemic which half-destroyed this country.
Then the law goes on to complain about pot being too potent...

^agree. this is what I've been trying to get across. we have a lot of history that proves this...

I'd have no problem buying pot if I wanted any...I drive by three or four shops on our weekly runs to play pool. Uh, another of those "been there-done that" things for Cindy & I. Hell, it used to be a sacrament of youth. Today? Not so much...

Today...don't want it.

I was more interested to discover that a Chevron station we drive by sells 92 octane "clear"...no alcohol.

Charles Freeborn, that is right on the money, could not say it any better.

I live in WA state, no change here just now the state is making money. it isn't going away and if it did, well, lets then make probation on alcohol happen again. We all know that was a failure.

A simple question, have you even seen or heard a stoner shooting anyone or starting a fight for the sake of a fight?

Potenccy? The good old days of Thai Stick and hash.

You are correct. It was far harder to get quality smoke in trhe 60's and 70's

That's right, eight years of a Progressive Administration that tortured the law by executive dictates and civil forfeiture is a conservative issue.

Watch this, Tom:

<iframe width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6M3P8sT4IFg" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I have no faith in government agencies. It is not a conservative versus progressive issue. Stop trying to infer progressives are any less prone to abuse of power than conservatives.

Back to the OP: I smoked pot in HS and college, on and off, mostly during summers. This was in the 1970's, early 1980's. There were two instances in my life that had not fate intervened, I would have gone to jail.

So I am familiar.

I want zero impairment from alcohol, pot, Oxy, etc. from my employees when they are on my clock. Zero. That is my right.

I want relevant testing protocols that allow me to judge impairment fairly. It is up to me to decide how to act on that data.

But anyone who thinks smoking pot at work, prior to work in such a manner that the affects are lingering, is ok is in denial.

Driving under the influence, btw, needs to include pot. We are not there yet in terms of testing, but we need to be.

Sounds like folks are willing to trade more DUIs and traffic deaths...and lots of other problems for a few dollars.

Those of you who base your opinion on the effects of long term heavy use because of the effect on you/your life and your ability to pass it up now are using poor rationale...as you are likely not the folks that did have the problems.

Personally, I could not afford to give up the 5 IQ point loss (studies show) that is expected with folks who were heavy users in their youth. Life is hard, but it is harder when you are stupid.

It should be treated similar to alcohol. No work and no drive.

It is not like alcohol . The more you drink to more drunk you get. The more you smoke the more you cough.

There are people who smoke and drive on it and they might be a bit slower hogging the left lane and that's about it! You can't smoke or eat your way into a pot blackout. There will never be a way to test it like with booze.

I'd rather have potheads on the road driving slower stoned then drunk and people on their goddamn phones.

Fint, "Reefer Madness" was made for folks like you...

Yes. I have witnessed all types of inappropriate behavior/lack of judgement after using...particularly with synthetics.

i Understand and agree. Wouldn't do it now but I do remember several road trips in the 70's...

Don't go lumping synthetics in here. They are not part of the conversation.

They are not legal in CA like CO?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.livescience.com/53644-marijuana-is-stronger-now-than-20-years-ago.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/10/21/health/colorado-marijuana-potency-above-national-average/index.html

Are synthetics legal in Colo? If they are, why?

Actually, I meant/was thinking about edibles...not really able to concentrate on my posts...sorry.

We don't need testing, we have trained certified guessing.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gWyzPpYslYc" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I was given a red sucker a couple of years ago. Out of Colo. It didn't do squat. I got sweaty

Quite the letdown.

1.They do
2.Immaterial, driven by liability insurance requirements.
Not to my knowledge. This is a HUGE issue. There needed to be an objective test to see if someone is currently impaired, rather than had used in the last month, prior to making it legal. See Colorado for impact on MVA injuries/fatalities
What, you never heard of a ziplock bag? Yes, it will contain aroma, I understand they dispense it in packaging designed for this very purpose.

This is where it would be nice if you were as smart as you think you are. Do you think I am posting that on a guess, or experience? I assume since you "know" it doesn't work like that, you have tried?

Every city. Every state. No issue I guarantee

So the smell when you were a teen remains accurate, but the potency has increased exponentially? Maybe you cannot smell it cause your head is too far up your own ass.

Todays weed is much more potent for sure, and I don't know about down south, but weed around here is sure detectable bagged or not. It passes through ziplock almost unimpeded.
Fint, do you believe government should only intervene where required? Make laws that are necessary and in the public interest?
You continually claim there is no relation between MJ and alcohol. One is the only legal non prescription drug of any popularity in both your country and mine currently. The other is on the edge of becoming the next legal drug for use. You don't see any correlation there?
Outside of this MJ argument Fint, would you like to see alcohol outlawed in the way MJ currently is? If not, why not, since alcohol is a more serious drug in every meaningful way?

He's lying thru this teeth in this entire thread. He has never been to a party where people were drinking beer and smoking weed. He is too square and boring to ever get invited anywhere like that. If he was anywhere near that activity he'd leave and call the cops and say there is illegal activity going on to get them busted.

He brags that he has ruined careers of Air Force members because they had a single can of beer. No way he'd be around weed without snitching on them.

Also Fint, synthetic MJ remains illegal as far as I know. That stuff has so little to do with MJ it is shocking it is called a synthetic of it.

That zip lock doesn't help much. You would be amazed at how much you can smell even when zip locked.

It also somewhat new so Fint is either around druggies recently or he is lying about being around druggies.:D

Anyone who believes a bag will stop the smell has nostrils full of BS.

As I say, there has been packaging developed for this very reason. All bags are not created equal.

Lots of folks carried a bag in their pocket at at school and you could not tell from their smell. Obviously, if a normal version could smell it through a sealed bag, they would have been busted. Yes, potency has increased significantly according to testing. Apparently those lost 5 IQ points are costing you here...much as Ayles has demonstrated.

Yes. There is nothing about alcohol that makes legalizing marijuana a better idea. They are totally unrelated. If you would prefer to discuss making other things illegal, it seems that should be a different thread entirely.

Did I say that I went to any sort of party? Of course I did not. I will say that I was very popular in school...but most thought I was a bit wild compared to peers.

Of course I enforced the lawful orders of my superiors when I was in the Air Force. I swore an oath to do so. Of course, you would not understand about service or keeping your word/honor.

You do realize that the drinking age was 18 when I came into the service...and did not change until I was an E6...almost E7. Only a fool would party with underage subordinates...or minors with a senior NCO charged with enforcing the law.

Unlike you, I can read.