We get it, you're gay about weed. You hit a sore spot with your stupid old boomer bull***** It's sore bc we're tired of your **** and you're wrong and we wish your generation would STFU and stop trying to legislate this country back to your Andy Griffith show version of life.
TX Legislature will ban THC stores before they leave says Lt Gov Patrick
143,006 Views |
1524 Replies |
Last: 18 days ago by flown-the-coop
My roommate at a&m made some baked butter cookies only using kief that he and I had saved from kief trap in our grinder the previous year and a half or so and i swear that **** send me to the shadow realm. They were only about the size of a dime, so I took one....and then a small bite of another about 45 minutes later.
Only time I have been somewhat uncomfortable by being high so check your dosage.
Still had fun though, just had trouble sitting up straight. Just watched Chappelle's for for about 4 hours that night. And I was still pretty high 8 to 10 hours later
Only time I have been somewhat uncomfortable by being high so check your dosage.
Still had fun though, just had trouble sitting up straight. Just watched Chappelle's for for about 4 hours that night. And I was still pretty high 8 to 10 hours later
Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
Been there but it was Rino 911BadMoonRisin said:
My roommate at a&m made some baked butter cookies only using kief that he and I had saved from kief trap in our grinder the previous year and a half or so and i swear that **** send me to the shadow realm. They were only about the size of a dime, so I took one....and then a small bite of another about 45 minutes later.
Only time I have been somewhat uncomfortable by being high so check your dosage.
Still had fun though, just had trouble sitting up straight. Just watched Chappelle's for for about 4 hours that night. And I was still pretty high 8 to 10 hours later
You know… I've enjoyed our conversation here during this crazy veto drama. I'm gonna miss you guys when the excitement dies down and this thread falls off page 1. There's a good group of conservative folks here who should get stoned together at an Aggie tailgate.
Enjoy those totally legal gummies!
Enjoy those totally legal gummies!
Philo B 93 said:
You know… I've enjoyed our conversation here during this crazy veto drama. I'm gonna miss you guys when the excitement dies down and this thread falls off page 1. There's a good group of conservative folks here who should get stoned together at an Aggie tailgate.
Enjoy those totally legal gummies!
The fight isn't over boys, we still need to make our voices heard to the reps and senators as this heads into special session. Hopefully we can have a celebratory tailgate after
techno-ag said:dustin999 said:techno-ag said:dustin999 said:
Weed does have pharmaceutical applications.
So does alcohol and tobacco. At least, that's what their proponents claimed back in the day. Walgreens Pharmacy got off to its start during Prohibition when people could get liquor prescriptions filled there for medical purposes. Doctors used to discuss the health benefits of smoking, too. Look up ads for the "T-zone" cigarettes were supposed to help. Benefits to nicotine similar to caffeine, etc.
I understand what you're trying to say, but that was 100 years ago. Are you trying to argue that weed has no pharmaceutical benefit now?
No I'm saying efforts to remove things from the restricted list have a long history of highlighting their pharmaceutical benefits. Years later after more study we often find the pharmaceutical benefits are not what we thought they were, though.
So if weed has no pharmaceutical benefit 100 years from now, that means it doesn't now either.
Again, are you arguing it has no pharmaceutical benefit? You're saying you're not but then you go on about how they used to say the same about alcohol and tobacco.
Just say what you stand for.
Abbott replying to Patrick
To be clear, the Arkansas law differs from S.B. 3 in legally consequential ways. Unlike the Texas bill, Arkansas’ law did not ban “any amount” of a cannabinoid, it expressly permitted hemp farming consistent with federal law, and it carved out interstate transportation. Those are…
— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) June 25, 2025
I was going to respond to some of his posts last night, but I'd already popped a gummy and decided I didn't care enough at that point. Bullet Train is even funnier when it kicks in.Bunk Moreland said:
As has been mentioned countless times... For someone who supposedly cdoesn't care" you sure do a lot of talking about it. Are you just wanting the last word or something?
Oh I want to see chill Slicer
You want to see a glassy-eyed dude sitting motionless watching a movie and involuntarily falling asleep about 30 minutes into it?
Holy ***** We are old
Credible Source said:
We get it, you're gay about weed. You hit a sore spot with your stupid old boomer bull***** It's sore bc we're tired of your **** and you're wrong and we wish your generation would STFU and stop trying to legislate this country back to your Andy Griffith show version of life.
Where the only main character still married is a miserable drunk, and belligerent incompetent morons think they run the show.... yeah sounds about about right.
The biggest question to me is as follows:
How much will dip**** Dna lose in his cash flow if THC is not banned? Here is a summary of what I've gathered:
1. This is being marketed to kids
2. Many adults take this to
A. To relieve chronic pain
B. To help sleep at night
3. Both A and B have very expensive prescription medicine to help these conditions, so Big Pharma is losing money
4. These gummies, brownies, whatever are perfectly legal in the US.
5. There is a medical weed industry that also provides an alternative also
So, dip**** Dan tries to make something in Texas illegal that is legal everywhere else in the US, and something that people can take to relieve actual problems they have. And his excuse is. Wait for it.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN.
Well, dumbass, if it's the children you are worried about, then put an age limit on it. DUH
But, it's not the kids that are hooked on Big Pharma's pills and are losing millions by folks switching to something cheaper. It's not the kids that have chronic pain or sleeping disorders and are hooked on expensive medicine. Just banning the sale to minors won't help those he's taking bribes from. No, we need a complete ban.
If I remember correctly, it was dip**** Dan that was going to hold hearings to block the Texas Aggies from moving to the SEC until several of his donors set his dumbass straight.
I know there is a special session. I do hope they don't do something stupid. But both houses were bribed enough to get this stupid thing passed in the first place.
I won't hold my breath.
How much will dip**** Dna lose in his cash flow if THC is not banned? Here is a summary of what I've gathered:
1. This is being marketed to kids
2. Many adults take this to
A. To relieve chronic pain
B. To help sleep at night
3. Both A and B have very expensive prescription medicine to help these conditions, so Big Pharma is losing money
4. These gummies, brownies, whatever are perfectly legal in the US.
5. There is a medical weed industry that also provides an alternative also
So, dip**** Dan tries to make something in Texas illegal that is legal everywhere else in the US, and something that people can take to relieve actual problems they have. And his excuse is. Wait for it.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN.
Well, dumbass, if it's the children you are worried about, then put an age limit on it. DUH
But, it's not the kids that are hooked on Big Pharma's pills and are losing millions by folks switching to something cheaper. It's not the kids that have chronic pain or sleeping disorders and are hooked on expensive medicine. Just banning the sale to minors won't help those he's taking bribes from. No, we need a complete ban.
If I remember correctly, it was dip**** Dan that was going to hold hearings to block the Texas Aggies from moving to the SEC until several of his donors set his dumbass straight.
I know there is a special session. I do hope they don't do something stupid. But both houses were bribed enough to get this stupid thing passed in the first place.
I won't hold my breath.
Charpie said:
Abbott replying to PatrickTo be clear, the Arkansas law differs from S.B. 3 in legally consequential ways. Unlike the Texas bill, Arkansas’ law did not ban “any amount” of a cannabinoid, it expressly permitted hemp farming consistent with federal law, and it carved out interstate transportation. Those are…
— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) June 25, 2025
Unlike Patrick, Abbott's response was measured, to the point, and factual. It definitely appears that Abbott knows this bill is very unpopular and isn't going to cave to Patrick's tantrum for a full ban.
They'll pull the products from gas station convenience stores and require sales permits that will be too expensive for these pop-up vape huts that are on every street corner to afford. The industry will be cleaned up a bit and formalized and they'll probably slap a sin tax on top.Science Denier said:
I know there is a special session. I do hope they don't do something stupid. But both houses were bribed enough to get this stupid thing passed in the first place.
I won't hold my breath.
I think this is what the industry is expecting and many would find reasonable...sans the sin tax.
The initial bill passed because of groupthink. Now that the governor has chimed in, they will all pivot the other direction.
Some things to keep in mind.
The only reason the initial ban was passed was that Patrick was holding school funding hostage. Right now, he has no leverage. That is why you are seeing him act out the way that he is. He literally has no power. He can't bully a damn thing. The House won't pass a ban. They want what Abbott wants.
We need to continue to put pressure on our reps!
The only reason the initial ban was passed was that Patrick was holding school funding hostage. Right now, he has no leverage. That is why you are seeing him act out the way that he is. He literally has no power. He can't bully a damn thing. The House won't pass a ban. They want what Abbott wants.
We need to continue to put pressure on our reps!
You say all that and yet already confessed to enjoying a few drinks here and there.
Please... tell me the difference in your mind between a few drinks and a gummy at night. What mental gymnastics are you doing to convince yourself one is good and one is bad?
Again, if someone were to come on here and say all narcotics are bad, including alcohol, and should be banned; at least I could respect the consistency in that opinion. Yours is simply a boomer opinion because your generation has delusional and irrational opinions on THC.
Please... tell me the difference in your mind between a few drinks and a gummy at night. What mental gymnastics are you doing to convince yourself one is good and one is bad?
Again, if someone were to come on here and say all narcotics are bad, including alcohol, and should be banned; at least I could respect the consistency in that opinion. Yours is simply a boomer opinion because your generation has delusional and irrational opinions on THC.
Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
So, what is your opinion?Rattler12 said:Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
Should THC products be taken away by our government, when it is legal almost everywhere else in the country?
Abbott's proposal effectively makes anyone who wants to sell THC in Texas be licensed and manufacture it here. Definitely going to limit competition. Outside of "boutique dispensaries", I don't see much gas station/vape shop THC that would be compliant with the proposed rulesdodger02 said:They'll pull the products from gas station convenience stores and require sales permits that will be too expensive for these pop-up vape huts that are on every street corner to afford. The industry will be cleaned up a bit and formalized and they'll probably slap a sin tax on top.Science Denier said:
I know there is a special session. I do hope they don't do something stupid. But both houses were bribed enough to get this stupid thing passed in the first place.
I won't hold my breath.
I think this is what the industry is expecting and many would find reasonable...sans the sin tax.
The initial bill passed because of groupthink. Now that the governor has chimed in, they will all pivot the other direction.
- Testing must be required at every phase of production and manufacturing, including for both plants and derivative consumable products
- Manufacturing and processing facilities must be subjected to permitting and food safety rules
- Permit and registration fees must suffice to support robust enforcement and testing by the TABC, in partnership with other state agencies
- Labels must include a surgeon general-style warning, a clear disclosure of all ingredients, including the THC contents, and a scannable barcode or QR code linking to test results
You made your opinion made, so why are you still in this thread? The stuff is not going to be banned.Rattler12 said:Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
Seems reasonable to me if the alternative is an outright ban.
Quote:
Abbott's proposal effectively makes anyone who wants to sell THC in Texas be licensed and manufacture it here
Why should we be limited to Texas grown hemp only? It's legal under federal law so we should have access to products made elsewhere…
Gig em G said:
Why should we be limited to Texas grown hemp only? It's legal under federal law so we should have access to products made elsewhere…
No idea but perhaps it's the same rationale as Oklahoma having only 3.2% beer? Is that still a thing?
Because I am a paying member of TexAgs. Also in a free society all opinions whether for, against or indifferent on matters such as this should be heard whether those opinions agree with yours, mine and others or not. Agreed?samurai_science said:You made your opinion made, so why are you still in this thread? The stuff is not going to be banned.Rattler12 said:Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
how do you think manufacturers/producers of THC comply with these bullets otherwise? I'm not familiar with how out of state liquor gets imported. I assume it'll be a similar processScience Denier said:Quote:
Abbott's proposal effectively makes anyone who wants to sell THC in Texas be licensed and manufacture it here
TABC is going to be in and out of these stores just like they are with alcohol manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.
Quote:Manufacturing and processing facilities must be subjected to permitting and food safety rules Permit and registration fees must suffice to support robust enforcement and testing by the TABC, in partnership with other state agencies
No one said you cant post. Read the room.Rattler12 said:Because I am a paying member of TexAgs. Also in a free society all opinions whether for, against or indifferent on matters such as this should be heard whether those opinions agree with yours, mine and others or not. Agreedsamurai_science said:You made your opinion made, so why are you still in this thread? The stuff is not going to be banned.Rattler12 said:Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
Then why did you ask the question?samurai_science said:No one said you cant post. Read the room.Rattler12 said:Because I am a paying member of TexAgs. Also in a free society all opinions whether for, against or indifferent on matters such as this should be heard whether those opinions agree with yours, mine and others or not. Agreedsamurai_science said:You made your opinion made, so why are you still in this thread? The stuff is not going to be banned.Rattler12 said:Once again please point to any post that I've made in this thread that I said it should be illegal. Whether it's legal or not illegal is of no consequence to me one way or the other. I am all for the rights of the people. You folks that want to participate have the right to do so whether it's legal or illegal. I and folks like me have the same right to not participate in the use of it for whatever reason we choose. Folks on both sides of the equation have their opinions and that's all they are opinions. For those who support the use, yours works for you and mine works for me.ShaggySLC said:Rattler is out there on this thread, not sure what point he is trying to make other than he can't handle pot so it should be illegal. He keeps doubling down too. Really weird, bet he's donated to DanTAMUallen said:
So weird
txyaloo said:how do you think manufacturers/producers of THC comply with these bullets otherwise? I'm not familiar with how out of state liquor gets imported. I assume it'll be a similar processScience Denier said:Quote:
Abbott's proposal effectively makes anyone who wants to sell THC in Texas be licensed and manufacture it here
TABC is going to be in and out of these stores just like they are with alcohol manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.Quote:Manufacturing and processing facilities must be subjected to permitting and food safety rules Permit and registration fees must suffice to support robust enforcement and testing by the TABC, in partnership with other state agencies
Why would them make it mandatory to be manufactured here? You can monitor that the product meets the standards, and you can monitor the store jts sold in.
But forcing it to be manufactured in the state seems like it is essentially a ban.
Wouldn't put it past our government to hide a ban under some stupid requirement and lying to the population.
What am I missing?
I will preface this by saying that I do not like the stuff they sell here. At least in my very limited experience it just didn't work for me. It is too strong in all of the wrong ways. So whether or not it is banned will not change my consumption.
My problem was the audacity of it all. Just around me, a small smoke shop has opened in the end of a gas station that has also re opened after being closed for over a decade. An Indian couple put a lot of money into that and the eyesore at the corner of our neighborhood is now completely redone. They also sell live minnows which is really cool. Our other, bigger gas station down at the light has invested a bit of space for it, as has the liquor store on the other end of the light. And a friend of ours is a regional salesperson for one of the products.
So just in my small town outside the burbs I can count three people that have staked their careers and finances on it and two more business owners that have a revenue stream from it.
And Patrick was just going to come in and put them all out of business? To save the children? Because he was getting paid by lobbyists? WTF??
My problem was the audacity of it all. Just around me, a small smoke shop has opened in the end of a gas station that has also re opened after being closed for over a decade. An Indian couple put a lot of money into that and the eyesore at the corner of our neighborhood is now completely redone. They also sell live minnows which is really cool. Our other, bigger gas station down at the light has invested a bit of space for it, as has the liquor store on the other end of the light. And a friend of ours is a regional salesperson for one of the products.
So just in my small town outside the burbs I can count three people that have staked their careers and finances on it and two more business owners that have a revenue stream from it.
And Patrick was just going to come in and put them all out of business? To save the children? Because he was getting paid by lobbyists? WTF??
Made for an extra fun tailgate at LSU game this year....it helps regulate alcohol consumption for a lot of us, and find a healthy "balance". Felt totally fine the next day. Many night games/tailgates I cannot say that about in the past.Philo B 93 said:
You know… I've enjoyed our conversation here during this crazy veto drama. I'm gonna miss you guys when the excitement dies down and this thread falls off page 1. There's a good group of conservative folks here who should get stoned together at an Aggie tailgate.
Enjoy those totally legal gummies!
We also microdosed psilocybin in the form of shroom powder lol...I could feel the energy from the crowd after Reed's first touch down in my core.
I wish the "xxx is the devil" would just try a 5mg gummy, or a small dose of psilocybin. Even if they didn't particularly enjoy it, which they probably would, they would instantly see that they have been lied to their entire lives. That it's not even close to the bogeyman they were led to believe.
Science Denier said:txyaloo said:how do you think manufacturers/producers of THC comply with these bullets otherwise? I'm not familiar with how out of state liquor gets imported. I assume it'll be a similar processScience Denier said:Quote:
Abbott's proposal effectively makes anyone who wants to sell THC in Texas be licensed and manufacture it here
TABC is going to be in and out of these stores just like they are with alcohol manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.Quote:Manufacturing and processing facilities must be subjected to permitting and food safety rules Permit and registration fees must suffice to support robust enforcement and testing by the TABC, in partnership with other state agencies
Why would them make it mandatory to be manufactured here? You can monitor that the product meets the standards, and you can monitor the store jts sold in.
But forcing it to be manufactured in the state seems like it is essentially a ban.
Wouldn't put it past our government to hide a ban under some stupid requirement and lying to the population.
What am I missing?
I've followed the Legislature for a long time. Abbott's bullet points in his press release announcing the veto read to me as the incremental step/framework for full legalization in the next couple of sessions. We always dip our toes into "controversial" policies over multiple sessions before ending up at the full end state.
Look at what he's requesting:
1) Child resistant/tamper proof packaging. Most THC products I see in Texas or other states aren't sold this way
2) Texas specific product labeling and guidance.
3) multiple steps of testing in the production process. will lab reports have to be sent to the state? In person enforcement?
4) manufacturing/processing plants have to be licensed and inspected by the state
5) permits have to cover cost of TABC enforcement
6) THC content must be limited to some "Texas" specific maximum
7) Additional funding needed to for law enforcement resources to "vigorously support" the enforcement of these laws
That's a lot of Texas specific BS and regulations. The testing/licensing requirements make me think THC products sold in Texas will have to be made here. We'll have to see what the initial proposed legislation looks like
Im okay with those regulations as long as they aren't made to block small businesses from entering the market to create competition, which a lot of regulations pushed by big lobbyists try to do.
Featured Stories
See All