Hippy dream now a billion-dollar industry with California set to legalise cannabis (Page 3): There see you just proved your self B's king. On the no benefits. Lol...

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

Well, that’s because there is no hypocrisy involve... (show quote)

There see you just proved your self B's king. On the no benefits. Lol

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

dirtpusher wrote:

There see you just proved your self B's king. On the no benefits. Lol

I’ve never denied the benes. Again, learn to read, son! The only debate is do the benes outweigh the downside risks, that’s all. As an example, some over history have said there are great benes to sterilizing and killing all the stupid people......however, the risks were prison and or death by government decree. Note that those pushing said sterilization and death were the progressives of the time.

RainierView Loc: Eatonville, WA

I always drive safely and watch out for the 'other guy'. There has always been pot users driving around. Just now some get it legally so states profit instead of drug dealers.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

dirtpusher wrote:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/30/california-legalise-cannabis-hippy-dream-billion-dollar-industry

It's about time people started being reasonable about marijuana. Because of the way it's classified, it's almost impossible for an institution to study the effects of marijuana. Israel is the world leader in researching and discovering the effects, and they have an active medical program using it.

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

I’ve never denied the benes. Again, learn to read, son! The only debate is do the benes outweigh the downside risks, that’s all. As an example, some over history have said there are great benes to sterilizing and killing all the stupid people......however, the risks were prison and or death by government decree. Note that those pushing said sterilization and death were the progressives of the time.

Did you not say this same benifit without the.

quote=Cykdelic]They get the same heath benes from the cannibis with the THC extracted. The fact that these supporters in all of these states insist on the THC in shows me that it’s the “high” they are looking for,

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

dirtpusher wrote:

Did you not say this same benifit without the.

quote=Cykdelic]They get the same heath benes from the cannibis with the THC extracted. The fact that these supporters in all of these states insist on the THC in shows me that it’s the “high” they are looking for,

Your question is just another non sequiter. Look at the chart.....it’s that simple. It’s clear from the chart I see that there are benefits, and it’s clear the major benes are in the CBD, and the high is in the THC.

Next question???????

htbrown Loc: San Francisco Bay Area

mas24 wrote:

<snip> DUI for pot?

You bet. The authorities are quite clear on this, and have been running ads for a while. The law doesn't specify what substance whose influence you're driving under. Impaired driving is a DUI bust.

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

Your question is just another non sequiter. Look at the chart.....it’s that simple. It’s clear from the chart I see that there are benefits, and it’s clear the major benes are in the CBD, and the high is in the THC.

Next question???????

So you do contradictory yourself. Was it because of your data again. Lol

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

dirtpusher wrote:

So you do contradictory yourself. Was it because of your data again. Lol

no contradiction, but further proof you still cannot read and comprehend.

sad.

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

no contradiction, but further proof you still cannot read and comprehend.

sad.

So does thc help with ills or not. Or it just for the high lol

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

dirtpusher wrote:

So does thc help with ills or not. Or it just for the high lol

Again.......the research indicates they can help in the areas I already laid out for you and again, the decision is whether the benes outweigh the risks. It’s a simple statement.

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

They get the same heath benes from the cannibis with the THC extracted. The fact that these supporters in all of these states insist on the THC in shows me that it’s the “high” they are looking for, not the health benes!

Also, u dear the heading of EXTREME HYPOCRISY, we have the same people who screamed about smoking, in public and elsewhere, now supporting smoking doobie.

Simple fact....NO smoking is good for you, and NO second hand smoke is good for you.

Seems that in this statement it works just as well without the thc. So if thc has it's own beneifical properties. How will that work if it removed. An it just to get the high out of it.

Back peddal much.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

dirtpusher wrote:

Seems that in this statement it works just as well without the thc. So if thc has it's own beneifical properties. How will that work if it removed. An it just to get the high out of it.

Back peddal much.

Nope.

Read much? Not!

oldgeezer3 Loc: SoCal

dirtpusher wrote:

Far more health benefits than most want to admit.

Most those living in darkages

NOT "Far" more benefits; "some" more benefits; FAR more disadvantages than advantages. It was illegal for so many years for a reason. Users don't have an objective view and should not be seen as good advocates. They are a "tail trying to wag the dog!"

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Cykdelic wrote:

Nope.

Read much? Not!

Lol your shot down man. Thc just to get yuh high.

Then

Thc does things f ok or health. Well me another one. But thanks for playing. Think you were just a little short on your correct date a on first statement. Lol