Predictions that make you go ‘huh’? (updated)

Some… interesting… predictions in this piece: Pot law: Hazy days ahead for state

From Jonathan Caulkins:

Caulkins expects impaired driving to become a bigger issue, particularly after initial 2013 reports from the Washington State Patrol showed a 50 percent increase in the number of drivers testing positive for pot.

This is either imprecise speech or lazy reporting. What does “become a bigger issue” mean? It could mean that he thinks it’ll come up in political cannabis-related discussions more often (with which I agree), or it could mean that he thinks there will be more impaired driving (with which I would disagree). So I can’t really evaluate the prediction. And the second half of the sentence is meaningless and distracting. Any comment, Jon?

Note: Jon has other predictions regarding vaporizing with which I agree.

From Kevin Sabet:

Legalization critic Kevin Sabet of Project SAM (Smart Approaches to Marijuana) predicts little reduction in black-market violence, more negative incidents involving youth and pot, and an increase in DUI cases. Sabet said voters will start to realize legalization “may not be what they bargained for.”

He also sees the emergence of a Big Marijuana industry that finds a way around state restrictions on public use and promotion.

That’s not a prediction. It’s a wish list. Sorry, Kev. And I’d invite you to respond, but you’ve made it clear that you won’t talk to me.

Mark Kleiman:

Concentrated forms of marijuana, such as butane hash oil, will come to dominate the market over herbal buds and flowers, Kleiman predicted.

This one baffles me.

Conventional wisdom is that prohibition always results in more concentrated forms, where legal regimes tend to allow the emergence and popularity of more bulky, lower potency forms. With alcohol prohibition, for example, whiskey was the preferred drink and beer and wine were pretty much non-existent. The same is true with pretty much any drug.

I’m curious as to why higher concentration would be more desired in a legal regime, particularly when the majority of new use is likely to be casual users who probably won’t want too-high potency. If anything, the return of casual-use baby boomers, who quit cannabis because of its legal status, will result in increased demand for moderate potency product.

Now I don’t know much about butane hash oil, so maybe there’s some reason why it would become more popular than plant cannabis, but I’m not seeing it off-hand.

Unless the reason is that they set the purchasing limits so ridiculously low that people will need to purchase more concentrated products in order to have a reasonable consumable quantity?


If nothing else, this article gives us some fun things to check out and come back to in the next year or two.

Update: Mark responds via Twitter:

That seems to be the trend in CA and WA. No harsh smoke, no smell, greater efficiency, greater user control of dosage.

Interesting. I’m curious to see if that plays out. I can see the potential if it actually means greater user control of dosage. But I really wonder if it discounts the existence of the “beer consumption style” of cannabis smoking where people actually enjoy the social process of consumption and not just getting to your preferred high more quickly and easily.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Predictions that make you go ‘huh’? (updated)

  1. strayan says:


    The way prohibitionists talk I fully expect these people will be shot to death by heavily armed members of a Mexican drug cartel in 5… 4… 3… 2…

  2. strayan says:

    Oh and I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again:

    Would someone tell me why these guys think that everyone who has hitherto obeyed the anti-cannabis laws (and abstained) will suddenly decide to go out and break the DUI laws now that cannabis has been (re)legalised?

    In other words, why would people who have been law abiding citizens suddenly decide to become scoff-laws?

    • DdC says:

      Maybe for the same reason they abstained in the first place. I wouldn’t put too much faith in the general public to act responsibly. Or to continue to abstain. Especially the rednecks knowing they can sell it. Abstainers are flocking to get in on the newest gold rush. Two faced hypocrites. Nothing new. When it comes down to it there is not much in the way of ever sustaining the Ganjawar. No evidence or victims. Hemp versatility is not a secret. I still refuse to believe everyone was just suckered in by the guvmint. Oh really, it won’t grow breasts or cause insanity? Or make women uppity? The “Beatle” generation? Maybe those who smashed the records when they became as popular as Jesus. If that is the case. We have a nation of morons and sheep and it won’t matter much either way. They’re bound for the auction block.

      • DdC says:

        Oh I forgot. All 100% caused by Incremental Retardation. If Obama does what’s right and removes cannabis as a controlled substance. It would give everyone in every state an opportunity and less expensive product. Curtailing the moneysluts and giving the plant to the people as intended. As long as wall st buys the laws I don’t see Obama getting courage soon. As long as reformers appease, dismiss and deny wall st, there is no defense against them. Blaming drug worriers or giving them credit for any ideals or morals is naive at best. They follow the orders wall st writes. They are as loyal as the grant lasts or the paychecks signed from the donations that keep flowing. Donations from the sheep without time to follow blindly and still seem as if they care.

        Those of the 80 million or so boomer yuppies who just walked away when disco and cocaine hit town. Plastic people who can not think for themselves that is why they can’t help their sick family member because Ganja is illegal. They can’t speak out against the overzealous drug worrier town counsels and courts draconian sentencing. What would the other plastic people perceive? How would it look if they showed compassion for something they have used and know full well it is not what is being said. Unfortunately it has been cause for demonizing and refusing to hire or rent to those speaking out. So maybe they just act like sheep out of self preservation. Now its ok to frolic among the others never looking back at the trail of dead bodies and incracerated martyrs they caused with their cowardice.

        Same end result that has perpetuated the war for a century. Pick a demon, any demon and hurl it onto the masses and they will bow down and ask for protection. But as I said, the Beatle generation? Protesting wars and Woodstock and tie dyes and now its quasi legal with a politicians word it won’t be a high priority to kick down the doors and pillage the place. At the end of the day the feds still rule the selling and hemp is still a schedule#1 narcotic. Until it is removed as a CSA falsehood, there be war. Congrats Coloradans for standing up for yourselves in spite of the compromises. More than most of the country is doing. I wish I could have stood in the freezing snow waiting to buy a higher priced “quasi-legal” bud. Guess I’ll have to settle for this quasi ilicit bud I got as I’ve gotten the past decades. Free delivery.


        My New Years resolution is to stop being so damn polite.

        • Windy says:

          I just heard on the news (listening to C2C on local radio) that in some cases the price of pot in CO went as high as $500 per oz due to shortages. Hmm, must be quite a few who didn’t already “have a guy” they could call in the case of a (predicted) shortage.

          Oh, and local NBC affiliate local news just HAD to put Calvina Fay on the tube to spread her vitriol, this evening.

    • Tony Aroma says:

      When someone makes some absurd claim about the law being the only thing standing between civilization and chaos, they need to be asked if their dire predictions apply equally to themselves and to everyone else.

      For example:

      Statement: If it’s legalized, what’s to stop people from being high all the time, including doctors and school bus drivers who will be high on the job?

      Response: So YOU plan to be high all the time, including on the job?

      Statement: If it’s legalized, what’s to stop people from getting high and driving under the influence?

      Response: So YOU’re planning on getting high and driving under the influence?

      I think the point needs to be made that these dire predictions invariably apply to EVERYONE ELSE, and NEVER to the person making the statement. And since the person making the statement is the ONLY one capable of making correct decisions, they should clearly be the one making the decisions for everyone.

  3. Little Miss Appleseed says:

    Somebody please kick them fortune tellin’ fellers in their crystal balls..

  4. allan says:

    fear-mongering profiteers!

  5. Servetus says:

    My experience with the vapor pen has been really positive, if you don’t count the defective components that require replacement at great expense, the constant battery recharging requiring one battery in use while one is charging to keep pace of toking speed, and the constant cleaning maintenance that requires soaking burner components in isobutyl alcohol. In this limited case, however, I think Mark Kleiman is correct in his assessment of the increasing popularity of waxes in CA and WA.

    In the world of innovation, new ideas most often succeed when they eliminate some kind of human irritation. The vapor pen that uses waxes, shatter, etc., achieves that goal by the means Kleiman states: “No harsh smoke, no smell, greater efficiency, greater user control of dosage.” And I might add discretion is the greater part of valor.

    Oh, and in terms of heating elements, if you want a blast to the past Pliocene, try the titanium nail sometime, along with a great wax like Girl Scout Cookies.

    • allan says:

      it may be that I’m just an old fart but I love smoking my herb. I enjoy handling it, the smell, the stickiness… I love the diversity in strain tastes… and I swear one of the finest flavor combos I’ve discovered in many, many years of smot poking is the mix of smoking my blackberry kush (kush baby) and sipping my special coffee. If I could make it a confection or cookie I’d have me a taste hit.

    • darkcycle says:

      There are also Vapor pens that operate on CO2 honey oil. CO2 oil is just that, refined oil, it’s liquid at room temp. They’re the “tank” style, and if you have access to CO2 extracted oils, I HIGHLY (no pun intended) recommend them. I have yet to have a defective tank, and the batteries on these last eight hours or more. As the batteries age they require more frequent recharging, but here standard batteries for e-cigs are so cheap, I just replace them. Advantages of the CO2 pens are, fill ’em once, and you have about 600 (that’s six hundred) hits before the tank’s empty, no opening and loading, and they are self contained (no need to carry around a separate container for wax). Now, I grab one before I step out the door, and I take it everywhere.
      I actually vaped in the FBI offices while waiting to have my fingerprints taken for a background check recently (that was before the lid was blown off, and they became common knowledge. I’ve had one since 2010, and for the longest time it was my little secret. *sigh* those days are gone, alas).

      • Pete says:

        I guess I’m behind in the technology of smoking cannabis. But then again, I come from an era where the purpose of double albums was for cleaning your pot, and hash oil was something you smeared on a Kool cigarette.

        • allan says:

          back in the day before the word “sinsemilla”… there were actual seeds in the pot of the day. Sometimes LOTS of seeds. They went great on peanut butter and jelly samiches.

        • darkcycle says:

          It’s really no different than smoking very high quality reefer. You consume proportionately less (tiny, grain of rice sized chunks, if you’re using wax), and the effect is very immediate, meaning titration in not an issue. It’s easy to identify your limit, then stay within it. I actually find it’s hard to get “too stoned”…you detect it right away, and stop.
          Problem is, ordinary dabbing is messy, sticky, and gets more so as the ambient temperature rises. The devices (other than the pen vapes) are clunky, inefficient, and mostly require a propane torch. It doesn’t quite “fit” with your casual pot smoker, wh is looking for an easy bowl on the couch. Takes preparation and planning. I do NOT see it “taking over” the market for those reasons.

        • strayan says:

          I rarely consume cannabis. Maybe once or twice a year I have a few puffs on a joint (I’ve never even bought any!).

          I’d try darkcycle’s contraption if he set it up and explained what I needed to do, but there’s no way I’d be bothered to buy one myself.

          Seems more like something for aficionados.

        • Windy says:

          Hubby and I each have O-Pens, the oil comes in a cartridge which you screw onto the pen. The oil is made from various strains and you can choose which strain suits your needs by going to (a good resource for anyone wanting to know the general attributes of any particular strain); though not all strains are currently available in cartridges, depends what plant material is available to the oil manufacturers at the time, but several are available at any one time and are marked with the strain name and also labeled as Sativa, Indica, or Hybrid, each different strain has its own taste. Use of these pens is very discreet, the O-Pen is the same size as a ballpoint pen and also doubles as a tablet stylus. If something doesn’t work properly, the dispensary that sells them will replace the pen and cartridge at no charge, and the cost is initially inexpensive, $25 for the pen, but the cartridges have increased in price from $35 to $50 and don’t appear to have as many hits per as initially advertised, but hubby loves the pen and hardly ever smokes a pie or bong anymore. I still prefer the bubbler, as I wrote the other day, but the pen is convenient at times.

        • darkcycle says:

          Both of those items will still serve the purposes, Pete, but due to technological advances only possible under prohibition, their utility has gone the way of the Buggy Whip. Don’t throw them away, though, seedy pot and turntables, as well as menthol cigarettes, may make a comeback.

  6. Duncan20903 says:


    I’d really like to know how the heck a person fucks up tautology. For crying out loud, tautology is even simpler than 2+2=4! (yuck yuck) Changing that to a tautological equation would be communicated as 4=4. But the prohibitionists are trying to sell the absurdity that 4≠4. I guess that’s why the factory puts directions for preparation on cans of ready to eat soup and expiration dates on bottled water.

    Now let’s put it back into words, of course using my favorite piece of tautology:

    Correct: If things were different they just wouldn’t be the same.

    In prohibitionist: If things were different they’d be exactly the same.


    Still, I think it important to put their jabbering into context. Now where is my boy Sherman, oh there he is. Let’s hop in the wayback machine and head back to 1946. With the benefit of hindsight it’s easy to see that the best business to start if you want a cash cow would be a drive in movie. Low overhead, start up costs, all cash business to ease the tax bite. 25 years later we’re still raking in the cash but it we also know from the benefit of hindsight that the entire industry is ready to go teats up because of the impending annihilation of the industry. Annihilated because the automobiles are ready to become too small for purposes of sexual intercourse. Well you didn’t think that they paid to see “Mars Needs Women” every weekend for the last 37 months, did you?

    We don’t even need to play with the accounting or try to entice the buyer with the promise of tax free income because the wannabe buyers don’t know nothin’ about the impending down sizing of cars. Since they don’t have a clue we’re able to collect top dollar in a bidding war for Mr. Peabody’s Drive In Theater Experiences Inc.from Kevin Sabet Sr. By 1980 poor Mr. Sabet Sr realizes that he’s screwed blue and tattooed because he overpaid. In this metaphor today’s prohibitionists are the 1980 owners of drive in theaters AKA played for chumps.

    It’s only human nature to panic when you realize that you see what you thought was a cash cow turned out to be a worthless old bullock.

    Like I’ve said perhaps 100 times or maybe more, the best part of the ongoing process of the end of the absolute prohibition of cannabis is seeing the prohibitionists getting marginalized into irrelevance. It doesn’t mean that they’re going to quit trying to find a sucker to buy their soon to be worthless drive in movie theater, or that they’re not going to get frantic and panic.

    I will speculate that even though it was never very easy to ever predict what stripe of nonsense that the prohibitionists would regurgitate and even considering how extreme they’ve been in the past, well, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

    (a bullock is a bull that wants a set of Neuticals for his birthday)

    • primus says:

      Please check meanings; tautology, bullock.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        I did, before posting above. You better believe that I learned that lesson a long (long) time ago. When I was but a wee lad I thought that Oldsmobiles were used cars for quite a number of years. Now that’s embarrassing. Especially when it makes the adults start cooing, chuckling, unexpectedly using the word cute, and that very cheek pinching.

        IIRC that was the first brand name business that I ever cursed. Believe me if you own a business you wouldn’t like me if I’m cursing it. I don’t mean naughty words, I mean, e.g. die Eastern Airlines, die! It’s most certainly not good business for an airline to make me endure a crash landing. Eastern might still be in business if the pilot had been decent enough to ditch the airplane the decency to put the plane down in a river. “Oh Mr. Jones you’re a big guy” said the suddenly white as sheet from sheer terror flight attendants. We’re going to sit you in front of the emergency exit and you’re job is going to be to block anyone panicking from jumping out of the plane before we finish our crash landing. In the meantime my brain was laughing like a lunatic Ren and I’m thinking what a great plan you eee-deee-otts!! Who’s the hell’s going to keep me from panic and jumping?!? But all that’s coming out of my mouth is okiedokie, you can count on me. Yep, I’m Mr. Reliable, I can’t think of anyone else on the plane that’s a better choice than me to guard that damn door. I must admit that this was a case where the only reason I didn’t punch that pilot on my way out was fear of retribution from the criminal law. Now I think if I had to do it over…well, it’s actually a pretty serious offense to punch the captain on his vessel. Perhaps if I had followed him home…?

        It wasn’t long after that that Donald Trump turned Eastern into Trump Airlines but obviously missed the fact that it didn’t matter what you called it, it was a dead airline flying!

        That /snip/ from Ren & Stimpy is disturbingly similar to my thoughts during and shortly after that ordeal. You’d also better believe that I was going to jump. “C’mon people! Follow me!! Last one out is a rotten egg!!!

        Better two broken legs on the tarmac than counting on all those fire brigades and ambulance waiting to put out the fire and deliver the survivors to the hospital, that’s my motto. I don’t think I’ve ever before seen so many first responders in one place. Only one time since and that was on TV at the World Trade Center on 9/11. Knowing that they were waiting there to hose my mortal remains off of the tarmac or even just make me a first responded was almost as scary as the fact that the flight attendants had turned white as sheets and had started to literally tiptoe around the cabin.

        tau·tol·o·gy [taw-tol-uh-jee] noun, plural tau·tol·o·gies.

        3. Logic.
        a. a compound propositional form all of whose instances are true, as “A or not A.”
        b. an instance of such a form, as “This candidate will win or will not win.”

        bul·lock [bool-uhk]
        1. a castrated bull; steer.

        Those definitions are certainly the ideas I was trying to communicate. It’s the prohibitionists that can’t get tautology right.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          Oh, I’m glad that I didn’t let it slip my mind to mention that the only thing wrong with the airplane was an itty bitty light bulb on the dashboard had burned out. It was the light bulb that lit up to tell the pilot that the landing gear had been locked into place.

          Subsequent to that ordeal I found out that this situation happens multiple times a year in the U.S. Of course it could have been worse: Southwest Landing Gear Collapse At LGA: How Could This Happen? What a coinkydink, I was flying into LGA too.

        • primus says:

          tautology in grammar is a form of redundancy. The example given in Wikipedia is ‘widow woman’ because a widow is automatically a woman, so the use of that word is a tautology. In North America, a bullock is a young bull. In Europe it is what we call a steer. When I wrote I was unaware of the European meaning.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Have it your way primus. I disagree with your assertions. But that’s OK, you post the way you want under your screen name and I’ll stick with my way under mine.


  7. kaptinemo says:

    The greatest irony is that the professional BSers were out-BSed by their intended targets.

    Think of it in engineering terms; ‘positive feedback’ is anything but positive. Without negative feedback, the system cannot correct itself. It gyrates out of control, usually with explosive results.

    The prohibs dispensed lies marketed as factual information. The kids, knowing they were being lied to, told the prohibs just what the prohibs wanted to hear. Which were lies based on lies.

    The prohibs believed the kids, thinking that their propaganda was working, when in fact is wasn’t. And on the basis of that ‘positive feedback’ the prohibs went on to build bureaucratic empires that the now-grown ‘kids’ would not want to pay for later on as adults, as they don’t believe in drug prohibition…or drug prohibitionists.

    Once again proving Robert Anton Wilson’s SNAFU Principle correct. As the article states, ” In a hierarchy, people inevitably distort the truth when dealing with their superiors, in order to curry favor or escape punishment. As a consequence, said superiors operate from an increasingly distorted view of the world, resulting in bad decisions.”

    That’s what happened to the prohibs, being told they were being efficacious when in fact they are wholly irrelevant to their target audience. The liars were lied back to, and the lies that were used to justify more and more DrugWar (when in fact the opposite was needed) just got bigger until they popped. As they are today. And the liars who told those lies are now facing the grown-up targets of those lies, who know the truth. A whole generation of them. A generation that doesn’t believe in drug prohibition. A GENERATION NOW IN CONTROL OF THE TAXPAYER PURSE-STRINGS.

    The ‘chickens that came home to roost’ have mutated while they were out and they’ve turned carnivorous. The prohibs had better mutate, too, and grow faster legs, lest those chickens overtake them…as they are.

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Wow, I didn’t realize that Roger Waters knew Calvina Fay and Mel Sembler!

      When we grew up and went to school
      There were certain teachers
      Who would hurt the children
      Any way they could
      By pouring their derision upon anything we did
      exposing every weakness
      however carefully hidden by the kids

      But in this town it was well known
      when they got home at at night
      that their fat and psychopathic wives
      would thrash them within inches of their lives

      ~~ Roger Waters
      The Happiest Days of our Lives/Another Brick in the Wall Part 2

    • Windy says:

      kap’n, chickens are omnivorous, meaning they will eat damn near anything, grains, vegetables, fruits, insects, eggs, and even dead animals, including dead chickens. Of course, if you want to eat a chicken you don’t want the chicken you are going to eat to have eaten other chickens or any dead animals.

      • darkcycle says:

        They’ll even eat chicken shit. Hence the practice in factory farms of stacking the cages and pouring the feed into the top cages. The chickens at the bottom? Well….you don’t WANT to be the chicken at the bottom.

Comments are closed.