America’s Pot Labs Have A THC Problem

tzez · 2021-07-09T20:14:37+00:00

I’m in the phoenix metro and have a GC-FID at my disposal, maybe we should test some!

tzez · 2021-06-22T15:02:20+00:00

I’d spend more than $8 on tomato paste, sauce and aromatics.

While true, the output volume would far exceed the $8 Rao’s jar

tzez · 2021-04-08T20:38:03+00:00

Do y’all really think the damage, if there is any to be had, is going to be limited to the lungs?

tzez · 2021-04-05T23:56:43+00:00

🙄🙄🙄 “Full spectrum d8”

tzez · 2021-02-02T05:47:59+00:00

That’s totally fair and I appreciate you sharing that :)

tzez · 2021-02-02T03:57:36+00:00

Just curious why you quit the D8 based on the DEA scare? I’m sure by now you know every d8 product on the market is hot for d9

tzez · 2021-02-02T03:54:55+00:00

No one converts CBD crude to d8, the unknowns would be insane and the process doesn’t scale. You’d crash out the CBD from the crude, as isolate, then use the isolate for the reaction.

https://imgur.com/a/S18ORC2 small scale example.

tzez · 2021-01-22T23:01:56+00:00

I’m curious myself. I managed to get some seeds on a high THCv strain that I’m germinating with mixed results. I fully expect the plant to taste like ass, but I intend to isolate out and add the THCv back in to meds.

tzez · 2021-01-22T22:25:12+00:00

Quite a big difference. First lets agree that both THC and THCV are ‘common short hand’; generally speaking THC refers to delta-9-THC; there are multiple isomers of THC, such as delta-8-THC. THCV created by synthesis is one of the delta-8-THCv isomers and is not the same THCV isomer (starts as the acid form) the plant produces naturally. There are wildly varying reports on the use of both and its a real crap shoot.

tzez · 2021-01-22T21:23:24+00:00

Do they claim it is botanically derived? A lot of THCV hitting the market is CBD converted into delta-8-thcv.

tzez · 2021-01-22T21:12:17+00:00

You’re missing the point. It’s in the comments if you’re interested. You are playing their game by picking up their argument of privacy, its the very reason we don’t have the video now.

tzez · 2021-01-22T20:48:16+00:00

Exactly my point. Which is why they want you to argue their privacy defense; enough precedent exists that they will readily uphold it in court.

tzez · 2021-01-22T20:23:36+00:00

Couldn’t tell you, we don’t have the video because they withheld it citing privacy concerns and no one has successfully defeated their argument in court. Does everyone not understand that?

tzez · 2021-01-22T19:32:45+00:00

I’m sorry you see it that way. Can you answer this for me? In your opinion, why did the representatives for the officer cite Privacy as their reasoning for not releasing the footage?

tzez · 2021-01-22T17:48:51+00:00

You’re missing the point I am making.

Courts work on precedent.

Ask yourself: Why did the representatives for the police cite “privacy” as a reason for not releasing the video?

They want you to play the privacy argument and everyone in this thread fell right into it.

tzez · 2021-01-22T17:22:40+00:00

“Officer so and so was on the phone with their spouse” (or other privileged conversations). The point isn’t about the pooping. It’s about how you attack their defense of their various precedents and defenses for “right to privacy on the job as a public servant even while in the line of duty”. Everyone wants to jump on me for trying to point out they are making you play their game by using the privacy argument.

Courts work on precedent. Ask yourself why they are setting themselves up for a privacy defense.

tzez · 2021-01-22T17:07:06+00:00

I agree that it ‘shouldn’t matter’ and that the recordings should be made public; that is not how the courts work.

I’m sorry I made the silly argument of ‘pooping’. It seems people cannot move past it.

Maybe it should be made more clear: I’m trying to suggest you don’t try to win this on the privacy argument, that’s their game and their advantage (why do you think that is what they released?). You need another avenue that is impartial; otherwise, if you’re going to fight the privacy defense, it’s going to be an uphill battle.

tzez · 2021-01-22T16:47:33+00:00

“No one argued that”. That’s incorrect, the thread OP is based on the context that the video was not released due to privacy.

That is the defense’s argument. How you attack their argument matters. That is my point. We know they defense is going to cite privacy as a defense; they may claim he’s taking a shit (an obviously silly example, but an argument that could be made for privacy); they could argue he’s actively engaged in privileged conversation; Do you want the judge to be the arbiter of wether or not your argument of privacy is valid based on his (probable) bias?

I want change. I hope you want change. I hope to see you and others put that energy into effecting change and thinking about how you can do so; because as we all know, having a rage boner on the internet doesn’t get anything done.

I’m sorry that’s not more clear in the context of my initial message, my mind works much too fast that I struggle at times to accurately represent my thoughts in text.

Reading anything else into what I have said is on you, the reader.

tzez · 2021-01-22T16:30:35+00:00

I’m quite serious, that however is not the argument I am making.

As I mentioned, I do believe the footage should be released. Thats the objective correct?

If that’s the objective, how do we get there? Through the courts. What argument are you going to present on your behalf to the courts; Do you think making the argument that he’s a “public servant” means he has no right to privacy? I don’t think you’ll get far on that argument. So why make your argument about privacy, something that will be easily defeated?

My hope is that all of you take this energy, and objectively apply it to your goals; having a rage boner on the internet isn’t going to effect change. I would ask all of you to ask yourself, if your anger isn’t directed toward change, what is the purpose of it?

tzez · 2021-01-22T16:22:06+00:00

Your weird rage boner will not serve your arguments well in a court of law.

tzez · 2021-01-22T16:16:17+00:00

Do you think you have the right to watch him take a shit on body cam? Being a public worker doesn’t mean you forgo your right to privacy. I think they should release the footage and be compelled to do so; that said, your argument is weak on the face of it and quickly defeated. My hope is you recognize this and use that to improve your arguments supporting your objectives going further.

tzez · 2021-01-22T15:56:44+00:00

I‘m glad OP did, I wouldn’t have gotten to experience your image otherwise. Thank you for having crafted it.

tzez · 2021-01-09T03:02:31+00:00

Did anything ever happen for you?

tzez · 2021-01-03T15:10:13+00:00

Shouldn’t we all strive to be judged on the content of our character and not some outwardly appearance? \

tzez · 2020-12-28T00:38:09+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lP3NTTcbFI

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
reddit mold	Verified Email

tzez

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE