Oh yeah it’s not something I’d mess about with if you’re sensitive to cannabis in the first place, although it does have a lower potency than the traditional Delta-9-THC, it can still get you stoned. Especially if you have little to no THC tolerance. Experienced users tend not to get much out of it.

I’ve had a very similar experience to OP in the last few months, it’s actually what originally lead me to discovering the fediverse in the first place. They have automated detection that will ban you within seconds of making a post. I appealed because I had no idea my alt account had even been banned from the subreddit I was posting on in the first place.

It’s unreal. Rather than giving you a warning when trying to make a post they just automatically ban you and will auto-reject any appeals you make.

Delta-9 THC IS what people just called “THC” forever. It’s the very same compound that’s found in your recreational or medical cannabis products. It can be extracted from hemp naturally. The distinction in naming conventions is a more recent thing due to the prevalence of Delta-8 THC products.

This legislation will also kill any federally legal Delta-9 THC products like edibles or drinks, and might kill a lot of CBD products as well.

You should know that there are also federally legal Delta-9 THC products that will get wrapped up in this ban, as well as probably most CBD products. Would be a huge blow to the legal hemp industry.

It’s not just Delta-8. Most CBD products as well as legal hemp-derived Delta-9 THC products would get wrapped up in this as well, and I am personally in favor of them remaining legal.

This isn’t just about Delta-8 products. This will affect CBD products. This will affect legal hemp-derived Delta-9 THC products. This will have a major negative impact on the legal hemp industry as a whole. I don’t normally agree with Rand Paul on much, but I agree with him on this one. There’s a lot of hemp farming done in KY that this legislation threatens.

Adding this comment because it’s very clear to me that most people have a really poor understanding of hemp-derived THC products in general.

Delta-8 THC is an unregulated cannabinoid that can be made by converting CBD through a chemical process. But hemp also contains Delta-9 THC, which is the same thing that would come in the recreational or medical cannabis you’d get in a legal state. The limitation is that the products are only allowed to contain up to 0.3% Delta-9 THC by volume. The funny workaround here is that products like edibles and drinks can easily still contain a recreational dose of Delta-9 THC while staying well below 0.3% THC by volume. This has created a legal market for THC products which this legislation is threatening.

There seems to be a lot of confusion in this thread about hemp derived THC and delta-8 THC. Delta-8 THC is an unregulated cannabinoid that can be made by converting CBD through a chemical process. But hemp also contains Delta-9 THC, which is the same thing that would come in the recreational or medical cannabis you’d get in a legal state. The limitation is that the products are only allowed to contain up to 0.3% Delta-9 THC by volume. The funny workaround here is that products like edibles and drinks can easily still contain a recreational dose of Delta-9 THC while staying well below 0.3% THC by volume. This has created a legal market for THC products and I’ve actually really enjoyed it, living in a state that still does not have any form of medical or recreational cannabis available.

I usually don’t see eye to eye with Rand Paul, but this bill will effectively destroy the legal hemp and CBD industries in America, as well as the legal THC market. I’m with him on this one. I am very surprised there’s nobody else fighting for it.

I disagree with your characterization of Kirk as just being a “right-wing populist” and denying that he held views that were deeply racist, antisemitic, sexist, homophobic and transphobic. He was a white supremacist and a Christian Nationalist. Lets not beat around the bush. From an outside perspective it appears that you’re trying to minimize that or even outright deny that it’s true.

I feel like you’ve cherry-picked a few examples of claims people have made that are disprovable while conveniently ignoring some of the more reprehensible things Kirk said and believed.