Floyd's Fine Cannabis opens in Portland

[fiamme red]

https://www.bicycleretailer.com/industry-news/2018/09/27/floyd-landis-opens-three-bike-themed-cannabis-shops-portland-considers-ipo#.W65X22hKi70

Landis said the Portland stores are being given a cycling-themed makeover to take advantage of his history in the sport and to appeal to those who are interested in legal marijuana for its health benefits. "We are obviously trying to exploit my ability to get press because my name is very connected to cycling. We are branding and marketing toward people with an active lifestyle, not stoners — not that there's anything wrong with that, but that's not who we are trying to reach. We are selling to people who have decided that taking a bunch of Advil every day is maybe not that great of an option."https://www.bicycleretailer.com/sites/default/files/styles/colorbox_popup/public/images/article/FFC_Portland_Broadway_3934C_1000px.jpg?itok=bocBlZ qp

[bobswire]

"We are branding and marketing toward people with an active lifestyle, not stoners — not that there's anything wrong with that," Good for you Floyd to find your niche in this World and it's legal this time. :banana:

[William]

PDX. not surprising at all....:)






William

[Clean39T]

Not a fan of drugs - legal or otherwise - or of numbing the body's signals that one should stop doing what they are doing and allow themselves to heal - or of riding in a paceline with someone who is on a different form of a long strange trip - but I guess I'd rather see Floyd's store when walking down the street than the other 10,000+ sketchy dispensaries that have flooded retail storefronts across the city..

Curious why he picked the location he did though - that part of Broadway is kind of a weird part of town - not bad per se, just not connected necessarily to any endurance sport hub/driver. It would have made way more sense to find a space in NW PDX near Forest Park, but maybe its about the dispensary license and he had to take over an existing business. Dunno.

[Expedited]

Very progressive, I respect the initiative.

[fiamme red]

Curious why he picked the location he did though - that part of Broadway is kind of a weird part of town - not bad per se, just not connected necessarily to any endurance sport hub/driver. It would have made way more sense to find a space in NW PDX near Forest Park, but maybe its about the dispensary license and he had to take over an existing business. Dunno.I should have been more accurate: Landis acquired, or merged with, three existing dispensaries under the name Tru Cannabis and rebranded them under his own name.

I didn't know there were so many dispensaries in Portland already.

[Clean39T]

I should have been more accurate: Landis acquired, or merged with, three existing dispensaries under the name Tru Cannabis and rebranded them under his own name.

I didn't know there were so many dispensaries in Portland already.Makes sense.

My 10k number was sarcastic hyperbole - but there seem to be more cannabis outlets in Portland than bars or breweries...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[MattTuck]

Wonder if a portion of the proceeds will go to reimburse donors to the Floyd Fairness Fund.

[weiwentg]

Wonder if a portion of the proceeds will go to reimburse donors to the Floyd Fairness Fund.

In 2012, Cyclingnews reported that Landis (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-to-repay-fairness-fund-donations-to-avoid-jail-time/)

According to ESPN.com (http://www.espn.com/olympics/cycling/story?id=8297769&_slug_=floyd-landis-avoid-jail-donors-get-reimbursed), Landis will avoid a conviction for wire fraud, jail and a $250,000 fine if he can repay 1,500 donors whose contributions totaled $478,354 in the next three years. Waivers will be required from the donors who do not wish to be repaid.

ESPN further reported that

Landis said he knows of several large donors who do not want to be repaid. Those who do will be reimbursed through the court, which in turn will collect a portion of Landis' earnings depending on how much he makes. He will be obligated to fully disclose his financial assets to the court.

So, in theory and if there haven't been further legal developments, Landis should probably have made restitution on this case after his settlement from the whistleblower lawsuit, and any leftover restitution would presumably come out of his earnings.

[MattTuck]

In 2012, Cyclingnews reported that Landis (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-to-repay-fairness-fund-donations-to-avoid-jail-time/)



ESPN further reported that



So, in theory and if there haven't been further legal developments, Landis should probably have made restitution on this case after his settlement from the whistleblower lawsuit, and any leftover restitution would presumably come out of his earnings.

Thanks for posting that, had not realized he was paying people back.

[AngryScientist]

Makes sense.

My 10k number was sarcastic hyperbole - but there seem to be more cannabis outlets in Portland than bars or breweries...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

i think strip clubs still hold the crown though :)

[jmoore]

Curious why he picked the location he did though - that part of Broadway is kind of a weird part of town - ...


cheaper rent?

[Red Tornado]

Not a fan of drugs - legal or otherwise - or of numbing the body's signals that one should stop doing what they are doing and allow themselves to heal - or of riding in a paceline with someone who is on a different form of a long strange trip -
I feel the same way.

[tbike4]

i think strip clubs still hold the crown though :)

Which one do you recommend? :eek:

[rcnute]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCDAfa-NI-M

Ryan

[Matthew]

I'm with Clean and Red Tornado. This full speed ahead train to legalize this stuff has me a bit concerned. Legalization gets mentioned on the talk shows and the crowd goes nuts. Does everybody want to get high? I can kind of understand for health purposes but the last thing I want is more people under the influence just because they can now.

[John H.]

Curious, How do you guys feel about liquor stores?
How is a liquor store better, safer, healthier, etc.?

[jtbadge]

Curious, How do you guys feel about liquor stores?
How is a liquor store better, safer, healthier, etc.?

This is what I was about to mention. Alcohol creates much greater dangers to the public and one's health than cannabis.

[joosttx]

Which one do you recommend? :eek:

Marys

[William]

This is what I was about to mention. Alcohol creates much greater dangers to the public and one's health than cannabis.

I would worry a lot more about irresponsible drinking-drunk drivers than I would about pot heads trying to steal Oreo Double stuffs from me.




Just saying...:)






William

[markmdr]

Curious, How do you guys feel about liquor stores?
How is a liquor store better, safer, healthier, etc.?

This is what I was about to mention. Alcohol creates much greater dangers to the public and one's health than cannabis.

I would worry a lot more about irresponsible drinking-drunk drivers than I would about pot heads trying to steal Oreo Double stuffs from me.




Just saying...:)






William

Exactly!!! Thank you for pointing that out....

[Epicus07]

I too think that there is an unfair bias against marijuana. It is not any worse than alcohol and in some ways much less destructive. I respect the right to want to relax once in a while. Its your life and as long as youre not hurting anyone, im good with that. The problem is that we have not developed a serum threshold to determine if someone is actively under the influence or just had a chill weekend.

[MattTuck]

The moderate use for recreation, of either marijuana or alcohol poses very little public danger (aside from the upstream ones of course). Excessive and irresponsible use of either probably poses a pretty big danger. The idea that these highly hybridized strains of weed are 'natural' and not a strong drug is terribly misguided.

I'm generally for legalization of pot on the grounds. That doesn't mean I think it is without costs to society. If we took all the people that go out to bars and drink to excess, instead take edibles and smoke, then drive home, I'm quite certain we'd see many negative outcomes.

[fiamme red]

"Driver high on marijuana when he killed Portland cyclist will get 6 years in prison": https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2016/09/driver_high_on_marijuana_when.html

"(Sacramento) cyclist dies after collision with driver who was high on marijuana, police say": https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article213447094.html

:help:

[markmdr]

The moderate use for recreation, of either marijuana or alcohol poses very little public danger (aside from the upstream ones of course). Excessive and irresponsible use of either probably poses a pretty big danger. The idea that these highly hybridized strains of weed are 'natural' and not a strong drug is terribly misguided.

I'm generally for legalization of pot on the grounds. That doesn't mean I think it is without costs to society. If we took all the people that go out to bars and drink to excess, instead take edibles and smoke, then drive home, I'm quite certain we'd see many negative outcomes.

I think the outcome would be... a slow moving traffic build-up. LOL.

[Matthew]

Don't drink so not a big fan of alcohol either. And I was hit by a drunk driver as a teenager. But not sure how potentially adding even more folks under some sort of influence is a good thing. I am sure I am the minority here and that's fine. But saying since there is already alcohol available, what's the big deal with adding pot makes no sense to me.

[Clean39T]

nvrmnd

[zzy]

Up in Canada, the major political impetus for federal legalization is to have strict rules against driving while high and the means to test effectively, and to keep it out of the hands of kids. In Canada a DUI is the equivalent of a felony. Not to mention the tax dollar bonanza. Growing up in Canada weed was far easier to get than alcohol. I can't argue with any of that. The realty in Canada as well as most of the west coast was that weed was so prevalent keeping it illegal only benefited the growers and dealers.

[dancinkozmo]

Marys

outside of business hours theres a sign on the door that says

"sorry we're clothed"

[ColonelJLloyd]

Don't drink so not a big fan of alcohol either. And I was hit by a drunk driver as a teenager. But not sure how potentially adding even more folks under some sort of influence is a good thing. I am sure I am the minority here and that's fine. But saying since there is already alcohol available, what's the big deal with adding pot makes no sense to me.

Following that logic then you should also be wary of the population having access to smartphones, right?

[OtayBW]

Legalization: everyone, including the gov't, gets a payday, which benefits schools, infrastructure, etc.
Decriminilization: another flavor, perhaps less 'liberal', but reduces the ridiculous amount of criminal prosecution and penal cost associated with essentially a 'nuiscance' crime.

Either way: win-win, IMO....

...he says ironically with a mild buzz from a local microbrew Octoberfest (no big fan of IPAs) bock....:hello:

[Lanternrouge]

Thanks for posting that, had not realized he was paying people back.

A friend received a letter in the mail from the Department of Justice with a form to fill out to get money back. If there were a Floyd's here, a gift card would have been amusing as an alternative.

[ORMojo]

I won't quote all of the posts above that prompted me to post this, but . . .

According to the MT state police, the driver of the oncoming car that hit the car my daughter was riding in 4.5 years ago, and killed her, tested as having ~2.5-3 times the legal THC blood level.

I have a VERY hard time adding another legal intoxicant to our (driving) culture, especially one that is harder (than alcohol) to observe, detect, measure, etc.

[Vientomas]

People are consuming pot in states that have not legalized it. So, to think that not legalizing it means no one is consuming it is a fallacy.

[josephr]

...he says ironically with a mild buzz from a local microbrew Octoberfest (no big fan of IPAs) bock....:hello:

Octoberfest is a marzen, not an IPA.

[OtayBW]

Octoberfest is a marzen, not an IPA.
Yes - what I had was described as an Octoberfest Bock. I'm personally not a fan of most IPAs. I just know what I like, not what it's called....

[Matthew]

Yup Colonel, I am wary of those on cell phones. I admitted I would be in the minority here. I just can't believe there are so many people, especially on a cycling forum that are ok with more people having access to something that can alter your thought process, reflexes, whatever. And don't even get me started on smoking it. How can that possibly be defended here? Suppose that's healthy now too somehow.

[Matthew]

Obviously people in states where it's not legal are consuming it. But do you think making it legal maybe more people are going to try it? And maybe become regular users?

[72gmc]

I would worry a lot more about irresponsible drinking-drunk drivers than I would about pot heads trying to steal Oreo Double stuffs from me.




Just saying...:)






William

George Carlin told me they liked Mallomars.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2c0SsG_YAG0&feature=youtu.be

[Avispa]

Is it me or is that schedule weird? 9AM - 9:55PM :confused:

[Scuzzer]

But do you think making it legal maybe more people are going to try it? And maybe become regular users?

Hopefully most of those folks are switching from something worse, like alcohol or harder drugs. I live in Colorado and we were one of the first to legalize it. From what I've seen the guys that smoked pot when it was illegal are still smoking it (or actually vaping it), the folks who didn't smoke pot still aren't, and guys like me do a one hitter once or twice a year as a change of pace.

They turned an illegal income stream into a tax base, what's not to like about that. Besides, as a road cyclist, pot smoking drivers are about 14th on my list of things to worry about when I'm on a ride.

[donevwil]

Yup Colonel, I am wary of those on cell phones. I admitted I would be in the minority here. I just can't believe there are so many people, especially on a cycling forum that are ok with more people having access to something that can alter your thought process, reflexes, whatever. And don't even get me started on smoking it. How can that possibly be defended here? Suppose that's healthy now too somehow.

Obviously people in states where it's not legal are consuming it. But do you think making it legal maybe more people are going to try it? And maybe become regular users?

Shame on you for applying logic to a topic on an internet forum. :rolleyes:

:beer:

[gasman]

I worry about impaired drivers from any substance including pot.

I'm just as worried about distracted drivers on their cell phones.

My observation in Oregon is that since it became legal there are still just as many stoners but there are people in professions (doctors, lawyers, dentists, architects etc) who now smoke pot after stopping once they finished college.

Not sure how much they smoke and I've not been tempted myself. Still, it has made some people go back.

[Scuzzer]

Shame on you for applying logic to a topic on an Internet forum.

If we made everything illegal then we'd be perfectly safe.

[donevwil]

If we made everything illegal then we'd be perfectly safe.

Typed from the driver's seat of your car at 75 mph no doubt.

[Scuzzer]

Typed from the driver's seat of your car at 75 mph no doubt.

Sarcastically typed from my living room chair. Making laws doesn't equate to having people obey them. Pot laws were one of the biggest jokes on the books only bettered by prostitution laws.

[donevwil]

Sarcastically typed from my living room chair. Making laws doesn't equate to having people obey them. Pot laws were one of the biggest jokes on the books only bettered by prostitution laws.

Totally agree, from both the real and sarcastic fronts. As a new "adopter" in backwards/forwards/back-again California I'm still in the "what's the greater good and who does that apply to" front, still awaiting a epiphanic moment.

[Scuzzer]

My epiphanic moment came when I was hanging out in downtown Amsterdam in 1982. Pot was legal, prostitution was legal and yet somehow this was a vibrant city that I enjoyed and never seemed regressive. BTW, I was only 17 and had been raised fundamentalist Christian since birth, aaaannnd to bring it back paceline content was a cycling trip around Europe culminating in seeing the Tour de France.

Anyways, pot laws seem to punish the lower socioeconomic classes and also enrich folks that seriously don't need enriching. At least that's what I saw at 17 in Amsterdam.

[RoadWhale]

I won't quote all of the posts above that prompted me to post this, but . . .

According to the MT state police, the driver of the oncoming car that hit the car my daughter was riding in 4.5 years ago, and killed her, tested as having ~2.5-3 times the legal THC blood level.

I have a VERY hard time adding another legal intoxicant to our (driving) culture, especially one that is harder (than alcohol) to observe, detect, measure, etc.

I'm a father of 3 teenagers. The thought of losing one to an accident like you did is emotionally incomprehensible to me. I just wanted to acknowledge your post and offer my profound respect for what you're going through.

[fa63]

Most of the marijuana consumption in the Netherlands is by tourists, and a lot of those get around by foot so not a huge danger to others even if they are high.

That said, they are also a good example of how decriminalizing something like marijuana (or prostitution) can actually do more good than harm. It is never perfect, but the Dutch are very pragmatic so they don't let perfection get in the way of common sense.

My epiphanic moment came when I was hanging out in downtown Amsterdam in 1982. Pot was legal, prostitution was legal and yet somehow this was a vibrant city that I enjoyed and never seemed regressive. BTW, I was only 17 and had been raised fundamentalist Christian since birth, aaaannnd to bring it back paceline content was a cycling trip around Europe culminating in seeing the Tour de France.

Anyways, pot laws seem to punish the lower socioeconomic classes and also enrich folks that seriously don't need enriching. At least that's what I saw at 17 in Amsterdam.

[s4life]

Alcohol and tobacco are (substantially) worse than marihuana in terms of physical addiction and harmful health outcomes. It doesn't make sense to have the former two being legal and not the latter.
The term "drug" is a misnomer, in the sense that it refers to substances that are not even in the same spectrum when looking at their side effects, from LSD, DMT on one side, to heroin and crack on the other.

[R3awak3n]

Alcohol and tobacco are (substantially) worse than marihuana in terms of physical addiction and harmful health outcomes. It doesn't make sense to have the former two being legal and not the latter.
The term "drug" is a misnomer, in the sense that it refers to substances that are not even in the same spectrum when looking at their side effects, from LSD, DMT on one side, to heroin and crack on the other.

And this is all there is too it, my thoughts exactly.


And I don’t even smoke/eat weed.

[saab2000]

We are in the early days of legalized pot, something I've long favored, and I don't consume nor do I have any plans to do so.

I've often argued, without evidence, that having it legal and readily available, will reduce the criminal element to it's production and distribution.

Are data yet available to suggest this is true in states where it is legal and tolerated?

Yes, I'd like to see a test for DUI with pot and studies as to how it affects operators. But without legalization we can't have any of this data. I still favor legalization but not necessarily advocate for its usage. Never smoked pot and have no intention of doing so though I don't really care what others do as long as it doesn't negatively affect me or others.

[oldpotatoe]

Not a fan of drugs - legal or otherwise - or of numbing the body's signals that one should stop doing what they are doing and allow themselves to heal - or of riding in a paceline with someone who is on a different form of a long strange trip - but I guess I'd rather see Floyd's store when walking down the street than the other 10,000+ sketchy dispensaries that have flooded retail storefronts across the city..

Curious why he picked the location he did though - that part of Broadway is kind of a weird part of town - not bad per se, just not connected necessarily to any endurance sport hub/driver. It would have made way more sense to find a space in NW PDX near Forest Park, but maybe its about the dispensary license and he had to take over an existing business. Dunno.

In CO, many property owners won't mess with any weed biz because it's still against Fed law(hopefully that'll change, maybe in 2020:)) so available properties are often in the less desirable parts of town.

9A-9:55p..huh? is there some law says gotta be closed by 10pm?

For SAAB2000 right above..me too..don't use it, don't want to but not many who get stoned do anything more than try to find a TacoBell..really no such thing as a belligerent stoner who beats up his girl friend. Many advantages vs getting screwed up on Opiods. Driving while stoned obviously a problem...I 'think' there's a on the road test but not sure.

As for black market/criminal element..because of huge taxes on weed, still a black market but the 'criminal' element is more to do with distribution out of state than street level pot sales.

[ORMojo]

What I've observed in Oregon since legalization is more white collar crime. Don't know if it has changed the other, pre-existing, criminal elements around pot.

[RFC]

I recall a study of the effects of alcohol, cell phones and pot on driving ability.

Two drinks caused substantial driving impairment.

Talking on a cell phone while driving had about the same effect.

Driving on pot, by comparison, caused only minor impairment.

[Fixed]

"We are branding and marketing toward people with an active lifestyle, not stoners — not that there's anything wrong with that," Good for you Floyd to find your niche in this World and it's legal this time. :banana:
Agree with you , cdb ,cbn for muscle aches and as a sleep aid without the euphoria feeling .

[ORMojo]

I recall a study of the effects of alcohol, cell phones and pot on driving ability.

Two drinks caused substantial driving impairment.

Talking on a cell phone while driving had about the same effect.

Driving on pot, by comparison, caused only minor impairment.

I'm not confident of that assertion. It is not the result I've been seeing in recent research. Much more research, and tracking of actual outcomes as legalization continues, is needed. Recent research indicates (I'm too pressed for time to copy every citation here, but these are NIH and other reputable citations):

Preliminary data from CDOT's Cannabis Conversation shows that 69 percent of cannabis consumers have driven under the influence of marijuana at least once in the past year—with 27 percent admitting they drive high almost daily. Forty percent of recreational users and 34 percent of medical users said they don't think being under the influence of marijuana affects their ability to drive safely. About 10 percent of all users think it makes them a better driver.
Colorado continues to see marijuana-involved traffic crashes that result in serious consequences. In 2016, there were 51 fatalities that involved a driver with active THC in their blood above 5 nanograms, the legal limit.
Of people who have consumed marijuana within the last year, 56 percent say they drive themselves to get around when they're under the influence of marijuana.
Combining marijuana with alcohol . . . results in impairment even at doses which would be insignificant were they of either drug alone.
The risk from driving under the influence of both alcohol and cannabis is greater than the risk of driving under the influence of either alone.
Another study that tested people’s abilities to drive while under the influence of alcohol and marijuana via a driving simulator found that using marijuana can lead to similar levels of driving impairment as driving at or above the legal blood alcohol content (BAC) level. Additionally, the effects of marijuana were greater when coupled with alcohol – even if blood concentration of THC (the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana) and of alcohol was “below the impairment thresholds for each substance alone.”

[RFC]

I'm not confident of that assertion. It is not the result I've been seeing in recent research. Much more research, and tracking of actual outcomes as legalization continues, is needed. Recent research indicates (I'm too pressed for time to copy every citation here, but these are NIH and other reputable citations):

Preliminary data from CDOT's Cannabis Conversation shows that 69 percent of cannabis consumers have driven under the influence of marijuana at least once in the past year—with 27 percent admitting they drive high almost daily. Forty percent of recreational users and 34 percent of medical users said they don't think being under the influence of marijuana affects their ability to drive safely. About 10 percent of all users think it makes them a better driver.
Colorado continues to see marijuana-involved traffic crashes that result in serious consequences. In 2016, there were 51 fatalities that involved a driver with active THC in their blood above 5 nanograms, the legal limit.
Of people who have consumed marijuana within the last year, 56 percent say they drive themselves to get around when they're under the influence of marijuana.
Combining marijuana with alcohol . . . results in impairment even at doses which would be insignificant were they of either drug alone.
The risk from driving under the influence of both alcohol and cannabis is greater than the risk of driving under the influence of either alone.
Another study that tested people’s abilities to drive while under the influence of alcohol and marijuana via a driving simulator found that using marijuana can lead to similar levels of driving impairment as driving at or above the legal blood alcohol content (BAC) level. Additionally, the effects of marijuana were greater when coupled with alcohol – even if blood concentration of THC (the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana) and of alcohol was “below the impairment thresholds for each substance alone.”



I agree more research is necessary. For years, DEA has made research very difficult because the only cannabis researchers could legally get was from a federal government farm in Mississippi and then only after a long approval process.

[Vientomas]

"This study of crash risk found a statistically significant increase in unadjusted crash risk for drivers who tested positive for use of illegal drugs (1.21 times), and THC specifically (1.25 times). However, analyses incorporating adjustments for age, gender, ethnicity, and alcohol concentration level did not show a significant increase in levels of crash risk associated with the presence of drugs. This finding indicates that these other variables (age, gender, ethnicity and alcohol use) were highly correlated with drug use and account for much of the increased risk associated with the use of illegal drugs and with THC."

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/812117-drug_and_alcohol_crash_risk.pdf

[soulspinner]

I won't quote all of the posts above that prompted me to post this, but . . .

According to the MT state police, the driver of the oncoming car that hit the car my daughter was riding in 4.5 years ago, and killed her, tested as having ~2.5-3 times the legal THC blood level.

I have a VERY hard time adding another legal intoxicant to our (driving) culture, especially one that is harder (than alcohol) to observe, detect, measure, etc.

I cannot imagine your pain. Losing one of my two daughter is my greatest fear. God bless man.

[glepore]

Having had serious neuropathic pain for a long time (sci c4in 2010) I can attest to the efficacy of low dose cannabis to make day to day existence better.

I'm totally sympathetic to the arguments about driving and responsibility. THC, unlike alcohol, though, has actual theraputic uses/benefits.

[Mzilliox]

I'm with Clean and Red Tornado. This full speed ahead train to legalize this stuff has me a bit concerned. Legalization gets mentioned on the talk shows and the crowd goes nuts. Does everybody want to get high? I can kind of understand for health purposes but the last thing I want is more people under the influence just because they can now.

People are already doing it, thats the thing. Most people who "do it" are fully functioning members of society. they are doctors and lawyers and teachers and business people. Drinking is perfectly normal for people to do, some folks think its ok to do daily. Getting stoned is much safer than drinking. If you are still concerned, go to a Dave Matthews concert and see just how many wealthy middle class folks like to get hammered on anything they can put in their systems. we live in a society that makes people look for escape. thats the reality of escaping reality.

im fascinated this thread gets so much play. it took me til now to come read all of this because my first thought was so what?

[pobrien]

I am surprised that there has been no comment on the deleterious impact on the brain of a teenager who used pot. It caused permanent damage.

How about the airplane pilot or police officer or ER doctor being impaired from using pot.

The current supply of pot is apparently much stronger that what 'natural' pot is. The impact on level of impairment may be more significant than what one may suspect.

I kind of doubt the illegal suppliers are going to go quietly away. It may be interesting to see how they deal with their new competition.

Never used, no interest in that or alcohol or other stimulant/sedative agents.

[Matthew]

I'd have to be high to go to a Dave Matthews concert.

[Vientomas]

I am surprised that there has been no comment on the deleterious impact on the brain of a teenager who used pot. It caused permanent damage.

How about the airplane pilot or police officer or ER doctor being impaired from using pot.

The current supply of pot is apparently much stronger that what 'natural' pot is. The impact on level of impairment may be more significant than what one may suspect.

I kind of doubt the illegal suppliers are going to go quietly away. It may be interesting to see how they deal with their new competition.

Never used, no interest in that or alcohol or other stimulant/sedative agents.

You might be interested to know that the labeling requirements of most states require the level of active ingredients to be listed - similar to alcohol percentage in booze. Edibles are "dosed" so you know how much you are ingesting - as an example, similar to having one beer, you know what to expect. Therefore, the consumer knows the relative "strength" of what they are purchasing. No guess work involved.

[s4life]

Everything you stated here applies to alcohol as well.

1. Irreversible brain damage in teens. Check
2. Working while impaired. Check
3. Alcohol gets graded, that's how you know how strong it is. Likewise w legalized pot
4. Illegal alcohol suppliers did go away once alcohol was legalized.. there was nothing for them to cash on, the margins were gone

Not implying these are invalid points, they are however not valid reasons for criminalizing the use of pot.


I am surprised that there has been no comment on the deleterious impact on the brain of a teenager who used pot. It caused permanent damage.

How about the airplane pilot or police officer or ER doctor being impaired from using pot.

The current supply of pot is apparently much stronger that what 'natural' pot is. The impact on level of impairment may be more significant than what one may suspect.

I kind of doubt the illegal suppliers are going to go quietly away. It may be interesting to see how they deal with their new competition.

Never used, no interest in that or alcohol or other stimulant/sedative agents.

[Louis]

I don't get the "well, folks use booze and drive" (or cell phones or whatever) argument to justify pot. Since when does one bad precedent automatically allow you to follow up with even more bad ideas?

You want to drink vodka/speak at full volume on a phone/smoke pot in the privacy of your own home? Fine. But the moment your actions begin to have a negative impact on my life, your right to be an idiot ends right there.

[pobrien]

Great summary point Louis.

I was trying to suggest that the current pot is a lot more potent than what was in the market say twenty years ago. The effects could well linger longer.

From a technical perspective, the RCMP and others in Canada are struggling to find a reliable way to quantify the level of pot in anyone they test. It is not as simple as BAC for alcohol.

The effects on the brain of youth are going to be significant (as it may well be for alcohol, I understand). It is tragic that we are spinning the wheel on the life long damage the pot will cause in the developing brain of teenagers.

[fa63]

Is there even a debate about legalizing pot for teenagers? If so, I am unaware. I imagine if it was legalized, it would be the same age limits as alcohol, or maybe cigarettes.

[RFC]

For those who do not use cannabis (and that's just fine), it is important to realize that dosage matters. For example, there is nothing wrong with a beer or two after work. You will be somewhat impaired, but not Kavanaugh drunk. For example, when I imbibe, it is one puff, maybe two, which leaves me slightly impaired (less so than 2 beers), lifts my mood a bit and brings my blood pressure down. Cannabis use, as a standard, does not mean sitting around all afternoon smoking Cheech and Chong size joints until you can't pick yourself up off the floor.

[cachagua]

"Kavanaugh drunk", ha HAAAAA! That's a good one. But,

The effects on the brain of youth are going to be significant... the life long damage the pot will cause in the developing brain of teenagers...


Citation/source/documentation?

[RFC]

"Kavanaugh drunk", ha HAAAAA! That's a good one. But,




Citation/source/documentation?

I do agree on the teenager issue.

[pobrien]

Tear yourself away from the Forum and search out the scientific literature for yourself. I did that for eight years, it gets easier.

If you want to go with the 'mainstream media' as fact, that is your choice though a bad one, in my humble opinion.

[oldpotatoe]

I am surprised that there has been no comment on the deleterious impact on the brain of a teenager who used pot. It caused permanent damage.

How about the airplane pilot or police officer or ER doctor being impaired from using pot.

The current supply of pot is apparently much stronger that what 'natural' pot is. The impact on level of impairment may be more significant than what one may suspect.

I kind of doubt the illegal suppliers are going to go quietly away. It may be interesting to see how they deal with their new competition.

Never used, no interest in that or alcohol or other stimulant/sedative agents.

All true as is true with alcohol or Opioids. One thing about marijuana, it can be tested for 30 or so days from use..for airline/ER/LOE, etc..and they do test this way(in the military also)..

ONCE legalized(and if you disagree, vote for the people that want to keep it illegal), the criminal element will shrink drastically. Just no $ in trying to supply large amounts via a 'cartel' to a locale in the US. Other illegral things, no doubt, like cocaine and meth but like alcohol, when it became legal once again in 1933, the criminal, gangster element as related to alcohol, went away overnight to be replaced by other vices, like marijuana...

At least in CO, the stoner numbers didn't get a lot higher, they just came out of the shadows..Those that used, continued legally, and some tried it, some use it more but most who didn't(like me), still don't. BTW-my wife uses a cannabis creme on her back for bulging discs and it works really, really well..

[pobrien]

You make good points OP.

Good to hear the US has good monitoring for pot levels in people in responsible positions.

You are probably right about the illegal pot suppliers fading away. I was not worried about that but thought there may be some 'friction' with new suppliers.

[oldpotatoe]

You make good points OP.

Good to hear the US has good monitoring for pot levels in people in responsible positions.

You are probably right about the illegal pot suppliers fading away. I was not worried about that but thought there may be some 'friction' with new suppliers.

Altho legal in CO, many companies and organizations, in Colorado, still say no use, ever, or risk termination..A lot of companies/organizations, etc, specify up front that drug testing will occur, including marijuana. Use and you lose....

Biggest issue with illegal marijuana is growing too much for a local locale and supplying dealers in states where it's still illegal..and MJ taxed heavily, so yes, there is a black market in CO..but I hear that stuff(unless supplied by a legit grower, that does happen) is ditch weed. legit growers DO supply the black market, as the MJ market gets really,really crowded.

Pot shops are all over the place. 18 in Boulder.

[glepore]

At least in CO, the stoner numbers didn't get a lot higher, they just came out of the shadows..Those that used, continued legally, and some tried it, some use it more but most who didn't(like me), still don't. BTW-my wife uses a cannabis creme on her back for bulging discs and it works really, really well..

This. In in states where its decriminalized but not "legal" its this way-anyone who uses can get well made oils or weed, and use discreetly, so no real difference other than taxes...

[Mr. Pink]

I'd have to be high to go to a Dave Matthews concert.

I went to one once. Prettiest crowd I've ever seen at a concert. It was like an Ambercrombie and Fitch ad in a large hall.

[Mr. Pink]

The effects on the brain of youth are going to be significant (as it may well be for alcohol, I understand). It is tragic that we are spinning the wheel on the life long damage the pot will cause in the developing brain of teenagers.

Gee, funny how we've had three presidents who smoked pot, a lot of CEOs (one famously smoked on a podcast recently, and a lot of people think he's really smart), and, of course, many of our living artists, writers, and musicians. All basket cases, I suppose.

[Vientomas]

Omg!

[PQJ]

Anecdotally, IMO, a drunk person is more likely than not to take the view that "heck, yes, I'm totally fine to drive; here let me show you," while a stoned person is more likely than not to take the view that "there is no effin way in hell I'm getting behind the wheel of a car now." Also, anecdotally, IMO, a drunk person behind the wheel of a car is more likely than not to take the view that "heck, yes, I'm totally fine to drive; I drive this fast all the time," whereas a stoned person behind the wheel of a car is more likely than not to take the view that "eff, I really shouldn't be driving right now; probably best to stay all the way over here on the right at a nice and easy 15mph." If the person in question is both stoned and drunk, watch out! As with anything, there will be exceptions, and don't try this at home!

[Mr. Pink]

And road and cyclist fatalities are off the charts in Colorado since they've legalized.

[daker13]

pobrien, that thing about the pot now being 'much, much stronger' than the pot that used to be around in past decades, people have been saying that for a while now and I don't find that information believable. Growers are definitely way more sophisticated than they used to be, and from what I understand, there are indeed high THC strains of pot. But the people I know in legal states tend to favor sativas, which have lower THC. More than that, the people I know who smoke tend to smoke at the end of the day; and quite a lot of people are happy taking one tiny toke and leaving it at that. A lot of people smoke a little weed to help them sleep, for example. I doubt that this is worse for you than taking Ambien or some other benzo.

I definitely do not want teenagers smoking pot, nor do I want people driving around stoned. But I don't want to be cycling around people who are drunk or on their cell phones, either. In fact, the scariest driver to me is probably the extremely angry guy in a pick-up truck who is stone cold sober and hates me for being some kind of "libtard" socialist because I ride a bicycle.

[Mr. Pink]

When I hear that "stronger" argument, I think, man, you were just stuck in a market of lousy brick weed most of your life.

And, yeah, angry old white guys are dangerous animals out there. I made the mistake of giving one the finger yesterday. Hoo boy.

[oldpotatoe]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/floyd-landis-comes-back-to-cyclingas-the-boss-1538650800

https://www.velonews.com/2018/10/news/qa-why-floyd-landis-is-starting-a-cycling-team_479852
If those people are uncomfortable with me being involved, I don’t know how they can spend one minute in cycling with any level of something at all. Have they never heard of George Hincapie or Vinokourov or … give me one owner of a team that isn’t involved, or wasn’t involved. And somehow they’ve made me out to be worse? If that’s how they want to do it, then that’s how they’re going to do it, but if I’m making them uncomfortable, it must be a very uncomfortable life in cycling.
VN: Have you been happy with the response so far?

FL: It’s been good. No one is ever going to completely take my side because of my history. I deserve to be scrutinized for that reason. But I think any press that has any understanding of cycling, and fans in general, would look at this as a good thing. Cycling really needs some support at this moment. We’re in a position, because of who I am, where it has a compound benefit, over and above what a normal sponsor would get as far as the press, and it comes with a little bit of negative return but at the end of the day I think for us it’s a positive.

[wc1934]

promoted and sold by Floyd - snake oil/pot oil salesman?
https://www.bicycling.com/health-nutrition/a23626250/cbd-oil/

[Clean39T]

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.18020202

A Population-Based Analysis of the Relationship Between Substance Use and Adolescent Cognitive Development

Alcohol and cannabis misuse are related to impaired cognition. When inferring causality, four nonexclusive theoretical models can account for this association: 1) a common underlying vulnerability model; 2) a neuroplasticity model in which impairment is concurrent with changes in substance use but temporary because of neuroplastic brain processes that restore function; 3) a neurotoxicity model of long-term impairment consequential to substance use; and 4) a developmental sensitivity hypothesis of age-specific effects. Using a developmentally sensitive design, the authors investigated relationships between year-to-year changes in substance use and cognitive development.

A population-based sample of 3,826 seventh-grade students from 31 schools consisting of 5% of all students entering high school in 2012 and 2013 in the Greater Montreal region were assessed annually for 4 years on alcohol and cannabis use, recall memory, perceptual reasoning, inhibition, and working memory, using school-based computerized assessments. Multilevel regression models, performed separately for each substance, were used to simultaneously test vulnerability (between-subject) and concurrent and lagged within-subject effects on each cognitive domain.

Common vulnerability effects were detected for cannabis and alcohol on all domains. Cannabis use, but not alcohol consumption, showed lagged (neurotoxic) effects on inhibitory control and working memory and concurrent effects on delayed memory recall and perceptual reasoning (with some evidence of developmental sensitivity). Cannabis effects were independent of any alcohol effects.

Beyond the role of cognition in vulnerability to substance use, the concurrent and lasting effects of adolescent cannabis use can be observed on important cognitive functions and appear to be more pronounced than those observed for alcohol.

--------



Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[fiamme red]

Short interview with Floyd: https://www.wweek.com/potlander/2018/10/02/floyd-landis-won-the-tour-de-france-then-got-busted-for-doping-with-his-portland-dispensary-he-hopes-to-introduce-athletes-to-a-legal-performance-enhancer/

What's your pitch to an athlete who has never used marijuana before and wants to know what it can do for them?

The best thing to do is use small amounts after a workout in the evening for relaxation and better rest. Better sleep helps with recovery, and that's a good way to start. Used in very reasonable doses, it's as good as any other drug that could be prescribed for managing pain. It doesn't make you so high that you don't function and all these things that people worry about. There's an entire generation of people that were told this is a gateway drug and the next thing you know you'll be a heroin addict. That's not true. We're trying to help undo that.It seems that they accept cash only?

https://www.yelp.com/biz/floyds-fine-cannabis-portland-portland

Accepts Credit Cards No
Accepts Apple Pay No
Accepts Google Pay No
Accepts Bitcoin No

[Vientomas]

Pot is illegal under federal law. Banks are governed by federal regulations. As a result, banks will not faciliate the sale of pot. Pot is therefore a cash only business.

[ORMojo]

Pot is illegal under federal law. Banks are governed by federal regulations. As a result, banks will not faciliate the sale of pot. Pot is therefore a cash only business.

Yep. And here in Oregon the cash-only aspect is more troublesome for the seller than the buyer. The sellers' not only, in theory, have to keep their receipts somewhere other than a bank, etc., but they also pretty much have to submit their tax payments to the State in cash. That's a lot of cash to be regularly hauling to the State capitol (which many are doing), which is why I'm working with one local government agency to develop a process whereby the local government can receive the cash tax deposits. Then, once the local government has it on hand, it is no longer "marijuana money" - it is tax money, and the local government can use the banking system to transfer it to the state.

[marciero]

Yep. And here in Oregon the cash-only aspect is more troublesome for the seller than the buyer. The sellers' not only, in theory, have to keep their receipts somewhere other than a bank, etc., but they also pretty much have to submit their tax payments to the State in cash. That's a lot of cash to be regularly hauling to the State capitol (which many are doing), which is why I'm working with one local government agency to develop a process whereby the local government can receive the cash tax deposits. Then, once the local government has it on hand, it is no longer "marijuana money" - it is tax money, and the local government can use the banking system to transfer it to the state.

In other words, launder it.

[2LeftCleats]

On my ride today over the rough southern Indiana roads, I had an epiphany about what I’d call my dispensary: The Pot Hole.

[ORMojo]

In other words, launder it.

Nope, technically not. The local govt is only acting as the receiving agent for the state's tax receipts.