I wasn't mocking you or your comment, didn't quote or refer to your comment in any format.

Who didn't sample it in college, and why would using it or not using it negate someone from having knowledge about the product.

The comment refers to the consistent posting from pro MJ folks here that nothing bad has ever happened from someone smoking MJ.

Is there a problem with having an opinion that doesn't coincide with the forum MJ contingent? There is considerable information available showing the significant increase in THC in products sold today vs back in the 80's. Here are a couple of sources.


https://www.mjfactcheck.org/potency, MJ THC today is 3x the potency of the 80's from 4% then up to as high as 15% today,

Link - Legal Pot Is More Potent Than Ever — And Still Largely Unregulated

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
I wasn't mocking you or your comment, didn't quote or refer to your comment in any format.

Yeah?

https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...980038505#9980038505

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
People who ingest cannabis, no matter what the method, are not motivated to murder innocent children and then commit suicide; they just want to know if there are any Oreos left.

These mass killers are sad, empty, confused and angry, and without a sound relationship with a loving, supportive family, they are adrift in this life, weed or no.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
The comment refers to the consistent posting from pro MJ folks here that nothing bad has ever happened from someone smoking MJ.

That is disingenuous. No one here has ever said such a thing. What has been said is that cannabis does not cause violence or aggressive tendencies.

quote:

Is there a problem with having an opinion that doesn't coincide with the forum MJ contingent?

No, I don't care what you think about the subject; the problem is when you fucking mock me.

Agree with Para. This is just plain old garden variety crazy that a lawyer was able to spin into a "psychosis". Or she was on some other type of drug that brought this on.

Sorry guys, I really didn't intend for this to turn into a discussion about marijuana. The substance involved could have been anything, and my concerns would be the same. When courts allow people to be absolved of responsibility for their actions just because they did something while intoxicated, that has potential to set a very bad legal precedent, which could lead to very bad case law. Based on some of the input in this thread, though, it seems that my concerns are probably unfounded and it's not likely to go that far.

I've never consumed alcohol, but if I suddenly pounded several beers or hard liquor, drove down the street and ran over/killed a child, I'm pretty sure I'd be charged, prosecuted, and convicted of a DUI-caused death.

Would I be able to make the excuse that my intoxication was unexpected or I didn't have any experience of being buzzed, high or inebriated?

Once again, no one has or will or should argue that cannabis is not an intoxicant and does not cause impairment.

Accidentally, carelessly killing another person (you can use the example of a child if you feel it bolsters your flawed argument) is not the same thing as savagely murdering a human being, which is a wilful act.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
MJ of the 70''s to 80's probably not, the shit they sell today is synthetic or cultivated super high THC weed, designer stuff, seriously more powerful stuff.

Jokingly referring to others who say this or not, I can tell you definitively after much personal research that the difference between 5-10% THC (purportedly what the "good stuff" from the 60's and 70's was) and stuff approaching 40% THC is that you only need a small hit and you're a little higher a little longer. If you somehow manage to take a massive bong rip (or five) that you can't handle, the worst that happens is you get nauseated, really uncomfortable, the room spins, and you pass out. Yes, it is possible to get too high. Everyone I've ever known who's done it does what I did when it happened: Lay down somewhere quiet and go to sleep. It's about all you can do to manage such.

There is no "designer" weed. Synthetic stuff like Spice and K2 "gas station weed" does not have the psycogenic, hallucinogenic effects people on this very forum were saying it does. Again, personal research. It was like having half a light beer when you're used to drinking a couple good rocks glasses of bourbon, which again, I can quantify. You can also still get the lesser potency weed today - it's called schwag. Would be about comparable to trying to get drunk off the .05% worth of alcohol in an NA beer - you're gonna need to go through Costco amounts of the stuff to feel it.

Guys, the mystique about a lot of this stuff vaporizes with experience. It's just like guns. We laugh at the silly shit people say who have zero experience with guns, and then we turn around and say what our friends and family and local law enforcement (all of whom do not smoke weed) have to say, which they, in turn, got from someone else. Giant game of telephone about a plant. It's akin to saying that something like "synthetic or cultivated super high testosterone dogs, designer stuff, seriously more powerful K9's" as if it makes sense. We've arrived at both Chihuahuas and Super Lemon Haze via the same selective breeding process our species has been employing for about twelve thousand years that we know of.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
I'd bet though there was something else in the weed, if it really was weed she ingested/smoked, since the only other witness to it is dead.

Never smoked laced dope, never met anyone who had, never met anyone who knew of someone's friend who knew of a guy who allegedly scored some dusted dope. Not once in years did it ever come up, and with a fair percentage of Baby Boomers who were smoking the dope back in the 60's, no less. It's razor blades in candy apples.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
The substance involved could have been anything, and my concerns would be the same.

Given my experience, I would be more likely to believe that the substance she ingested had anything to actually do with it if it were anything else but weed. Seriously. I've no dog in this fight anymore other than an interest to have honest discussions with it, because whether it ever gets legalized/decriminalized/rescheduled/whatever, I will never partake again. It being treated differently in this case because it's weed instead of alcohol smacks of California, and it is a bad precedent. "Sorry I ran over that family of five and killed every last one of them including the baby the mother was carrying and the family dog the father was walking, I was blacked out drunk and don't remember any of it. Thanks for the probation and community service." Nah, this bitch was nuts and probably smoked his weed in celebration after she stabbed him to death.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/b...thmia%20is%20present.

Ow, admittedly, that mostly seems to be about treating the accidental exposure of children to synthetic cannaboids.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/b...thmia%20is%20present.

Can I infer that you'd agree with the research and conclusions in these 609 books? Now, admittedly, some of them are dealing with suicide, but more than a few do not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/?term=gun

This reminds me of the off duty airline pilot that attempted to crash the passenger jet a few days after supposedly ingesting magic mushrooms.

I thought that story was bullshit. No way would he have still been high. He probably just wanted to commit suicide and was hoping the crash would hide that fact, and maybe his family would get a big payout from the airline.

Moral of the story: People commit crimes and then devise excuses when they are caught.

The 'experts' will study it and get back to us. Weed has been studied pretty thoroughly by the masses for decades already though...it's pretty benign.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Cannabis didn't cause that. GMAFB

That gal is just plain crazy.

What a load of horse shit.

100%. If she had smoked more, it may have chilled her out a bit. Weed sure as hell won't cure crazy.

Anyone that thinks smoking any amount of marijuana will make you kill someone else in a fit of psychosis has seen “Reefer Madness” one too many times. Nobody is getting high and doing what this woman did. There is obviously WAY more to the story than we are getting. Her getting off with a relative slap on the wrist is a travesty of justice, especially if she isn’t institutionalized for deep evaluation.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
Anyone that thinks smoking any amount of marijuana will make you kill someone else in a fit of psychosis has seen “Reefer Madness” one too many times.

Are you saying the hard hitting documentary “Reefer Madness” isn't factual?
Look Buster...I had a few close friends that went missing after crawling inside a bong in the 1970s. How do you explain that?

So, all the medical journals are wrong, and cannaboids cannot induce psychosis and paranoia?

Or, is this a bit like “I’ve had 2 glasses of wine every night, for my whole life, there’s no way chugging a fifth of grain alcohol could kill you”

Yes, quite frankly, I don't give a shit what the medical journals say. I realize that's harsh. Now, if they had all conspired by validating a virus hoax that ruined the world or some whacky thing like that, then I might have reason to be skeptical and dismissive.

I'm exaggerating for effect, of course. The medical research community would never do anything like that, but you get the idea.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
So, all the medical journals are wrong, and cannaboids cannot induce psychosis and paranoia?

Or, is this a bit like “I’ve had 2 glasses of wine every night, for my whole life, there’s no way chugging a fifth of grain alcohol could kill you”

If medical journals say “marijuana can affect your mental state”, I’d agree. But to imply that smoking marijuana is in and of itself capable of creating psychosis that causes people to stab another in a fit of… something clearly different altogether is an absurdity. This is not meant to insult you, but to agree with Para’s supposition above. Just because it is in “medical journals” does not give it blanket credence.

I am not a fan of marijuana. That being said I’m not a fan of gin either but I think both should be equally legal. This state/federal morass that we find ourselves in is idiotic. If your barista (I feel stupid calling the chick pouring me a cup of coffee that) can legally smoke weed the day before so should your cop, your brain surgeon, lawyer, airline pilot, soldier. You get the point. Legalize it. Or criminalize it. You can’t have both.

Getting back on topic though, this ruling is horrible. If this was ever used as precedent then our system is screwed. More screwed.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
Or, is this a bit like “I’ve had 2 glasses of wine every night, for my whole life, there’s no way chugging a fifth of grain alcohol could kill you”

Of all the people to lay this on.