There’s been a retail explosion with the thca loophole through the 2018 farm bill. It’s really only picked up the last couple of years with both price plummeting and access skyrocketing this year.

Technical legality has meant many of these sellers are using regular billing systems (Card payments, not cash only) are shipping via usps, and using square space to build retail sites.

They’ll know this is as least partially part of the cause is they numbers go up once congress closes the farm bill loophole.

I think you’re right, but you’re just doing it by classifying popular YouTubers as not celebrities.

I would argue that fame from social media alone (YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, etc) is still fame and enough to make a person a celebrity. It’s the same picture.

Just like a person can be made bitter and angry by the clouds over head as they shake their fist at them and yell.

The dude who self immolated over the bitcoin conspiracy really took the wind out of the sails of the modern self immolation movement. The willingness to do this says more about the mental state of the immolated than it does about the issue.

I was being facetious, I was at best neutral before horse gate.

Yeah, that’s his remaining audience in a nutshell. It’s legit creepy.

No, when he exposed his loli horse porn to the world I lost the respect I never actually had for him in the first place i guess.

It’s one thing to be so stupid you don’t have a different personal computer to do your weird jerk off shit. It’s another to then expose your creepy jerk off shit to your audience. It’s yet another third thing that your audience is willing to just ignore it and keep watching. Gross!

Pretty sure the only sentient being that would need to be worried around Vaush would be a little girl he wants to take on a stable tour.

Maybe you’re some kind of genius… Maybe it was that whole polls showing both Biden and Trump being beaten by not just any other Democrat or republican, they were polling under THEORETICAL OPPONENTS. Each of them could have been beaten by the THOUGHT of a different candidate.

Really? The advice I’ve seen for years at a traffic stop is to only roll down your window enough to talk to the officer and hand over paperwork and to close it immediately after. Along with not voluntarily providing any extra information and only answering questions as asked.

That’s for your safety, not theirs. You can argue the full tints, but the vehicle was surrounded by officers and many of them were aware this person was playing football that day.

In context this is one of stupidest escalations I’ve seen since ever and I can’t believe none of these other cops stopped it from happening. Give this a little more time and the rest of the guys are gonna get lit up along with the dude who’s on administrative leave.

Like in order to make this shit look ok, you have to full on compare the reaction to someone who was engaged in a crash or hit and run, has a warrant, or is a sovcit. They could run this dudes plates in 7 seconds and understand this dude wasnt a threat, they probably should have escorted him the rest of the way after they gave him his citation! This was a physical response to disrespect, ridiculousintimidation and you shouldn’t be ok with it.

Sov Cits don’t have documentation and refuse to comply with lawful orders. This gentleman gave the police his documentation and they got mad he wasn’t bending over and spreading his asshole.

It’s funny cause this situation is so crazy with how the cops escalated this situation when it wasn’t warranted, you actually have to compare them to someone doing an actual crime!

Like that’s how crazy this debate even is. Rich dude in super car being an asshole vs a person who is willfully driving with fake paperwork hoping a cop pulls them over.

Hill just looked like a rich asshole in a hurry and I can’t imagine anyone advocating that the police action was OK.

I really can’t imagine thinking that no matter how disrespectful someone was during a traffic violation, that escalating to pulling someone out of the car and putting them in handcuffs is ok.

Office was never in any danger, he was actually surrounded by other officers. You should be able to disrespect an officer and that should not escalate being physically handled like that.

The expectation for a criminal in a criminal act is to have as much force as needed applied to them to get them to comply. The expectation of an asshole at a traffic stop should be to get his big ticket and keep moving.

If you don’t want to be called a boot licker, stop licking boots!

I dunno, I’m way less terrified of the guy with a 40k watch in a 150k car than I would be in any other situation. Unless I was super jealous that this black dude was rich, and he didn’t show immediate respect to me. Then I might pull him out of his car despite having everything I need to write the citation and being in 0 danger literally surrounded by other officers.

I was saying this elsewhere in the thread, but I don’t even think that matters in this case, consent. Them consenting to shooting each other, drunk or not, wouldn’t save either of them from a manslaughter charge. Imo, being drunk in this case would make their stupid decision worse. Doing this without consent would just be plain ol’ attempted murder on one of their parts.

Like, consenting to a crime makes you culpable, and you can totally do that while drunk and get charged. Except for sex, where the rules about consent are different.

Yeah, that makes sense. This all tracking with my examples and I’m pretty sure we agree here! Is this person awake or not? Is informed consent required when delayed treatment would be dangerous if the person came in in an alerted state, comatose, etc.? Being voluntarily intoxicated to the point of being a danger to your own life gets your consent ignored in many cases because most of the time society won’t allow a person to just die.

I think I take your point about consent being not just sex in that context, but the medical version doesn’t really apply here.

“If we give someone benzos…”

Exactly! That would not be described as voluntary intoxication for this example, you as the hospital are responsible for his state.

If a person came in via the ambulance because they are in the midst of an episode of alcohol poisoning and are non-verbal, do you wait to take action until they can consent? You see what I’m saying?

As far as I know duels aren’t legal anywhere in the US and if you did consent to one, it would not protect you from the legal consequences of murder. In fact, being voluntarily intoxicated would make the crime worse.

That’s fair I think, consent in context of contracts (however not appropriate for this example). To your point the law does specify a point of being too drunk (black out, incapacitated), and the definition of that point, and if you were at that point can be argued in court. Even if you are not incapacitated, a contract in bad faith when alcohol is involved can also be voided (like I mentioned).

But medically if you are unable to give consent due to intoxication, that means they can do whatever they think they need to, to keep you alive. Unless you have an advanced directive or a family member that can legally make decisions for you. So that’s totally opposite.

Consent isn’t an argument with regards criminal charges, except sex. It’s the only case in which consent changes a legal act into an illegal act.

You can’t legally consent to a crime period, you can choose not to press charges for that crime, but there’s no consent for an illegal act, unless you’ve entered into a contract in some way.

Yeah, at least according to the laws in the US! Consent while intoxicated pretty much only refers to sex, or near sexual acts. In any other case, the fact that you intoxicated yourself to the point of making bad decisions, that’s on you (voluntary intoxication).

Like for instance, these gentlemen both agreed to shoot each other while drunk, that would only make either of their consequences worse if there was a death, it wouldn’t absolve them of their decisions to do it. They chose to get drunk, they chose to make bad decisions with guns, there is no consent issue there.

There are a couple exceptions, like you CAN enter into a contract while drunk, but if it was proveably in bad faith for the other party, it can be voided. So you can’t necessarily be taken advantage of for contract purposes, even if you are voluntarily intoxicated.

Again, IANAL. I’m just pointing out consent doesn’t apply in this situation. Especially since, according to being arrested, they were agreeing to perform an illegal act, or an act in an illegal way. The illegality of the act was not based on consent at all, unlike sex.

I think you’re right, but it’s possible theres some kind of regulation against shooting another person, even voluntarily. Them both being drunk under their own volition wouldn’t enter into it. It would be Mona Lisa Perez, that lady who shot her boyfriend through a book for a YouTube stunt and killed him. She got 6 months for manslaughter.

They aren’t having sex, a voluntarily drunk person can engage in stupid activities with another voluntarily drunk person and there isn’t really an issue with either party “consenting”.

Like if they were both voluntarily drunk and one shot the other and killed them during one of these exchanges, the shooter would still be responsible for a crime despite being drunk, and the other persons consent to the action isn’t really applicaple to a manslaughter charge except you may get a plea deal. However I am an idiot, IANAL, so take all that with a grain of salt.

Also if I’m just taking a joke too seriously I’m sorry.

(By voluntarily drunk, I mean no one drugged them, they did this to themselves)