legalise cannabis?

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
An interestsing statistic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2296269.stm

The UK had 6.7 "problem drug users" per 1,000 people. These include those who inject or are long-term users of opiates, cocaine or amphetamine, often committing crime to feed their expensive habits.

The Netherlands...had the lowest number of problem users - just 2.6 per 1,000.

That's because cannabis isn't seen as a 'problem drug' in Holland.

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
Personally I think that all drugs should be legalised, but I dont think heroin should be sold to non-addicts. This is getting a bit OT tho...

Why is it OTT? Legalising one dangerous substance is the same as legalising another. How are you going to stop it being sold to non addicts?

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
You cannot be prosecuted for being under the influence of anything AFAIK (unless you are driving or operating a digger or building a sky scraper or something, you know what I mean).

Drunk and disorderly?
Possession of a controlled substance?
Possession with intent to supply?

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
That's because cannabis isn't seen as a 'problem drug' in Holland.

The statistic had nothing to do with cannabis. It was referring to problem drug users of hard drugs. What do you think of this statistic?

Originally posted by Big RICHARD

Why is it OTT? Legalising one dangerous substance is the same as legalising another. How are you going to stop it being sold to non addicts?

OT - Off Topic. How would I stop it being sold to non-addicts? Prescribe it in the same way that methadone is prescribed.

Originally posted by Big RICHARD

Drunk and disorderly?
Possession of a controlled substance?
Possession with intent to supply?

Being under the influence and possession are entirely different things.
Drunk and disorderly. You cant be arrested simply for being drunk.

[Slick]

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
It might reduce alcohol use though! Seriously.

Well as I believe the long term side effects of cannabis are worse than those of alcohol that'd be like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
I dont see what's wrong with people trying it. If they are aware of the dangers and risks, and they are of adult age, what's wrong with that? It's up to them, surely?

That's what's dangerous about cannabis though, it is perfectly fine and safe in the short term, so people try it, they then find they like it and gradually get into a routine of having it regularly. Only then after the user has been using for some time does the proper damage occur. This is why more people use cannabis than say heroin, with heroin you can die from trying it once, but with cannabis there's no danger of that. You may think it's a bit extreme comparing these 2 drugs but I was watching a program on cannabis psychosis once and there were doctors on it who said long term cannabis use is far worse on the brain than long term heroin use.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Slick
Well as I believe the long term side effects of cannabis are worse than those of alcohol that'd be like jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

If eaten, I do not think that cannabis is as dangerous long term as alcohol, both for the user and the people around them. Hundreds of thousands of people die from alcohol related disease every year. In terms of the effect on society:

An All-Party Group of MPs investigating alcohol and crime was advised by the British Medical Association that alcohol is a factor in:

* 60-70% of homicides
* 75% of stabbings
* 70% of beatings
* 50% of fights and domestic assaults

The Police Superintendents advised that alcohol is present in half of all crime.

The National Association of Probation Officers advised that 30% of offenders on probation and 58% of prisoners have severe alcohol problems and that alcohol is a factor in their offence or pattern of offending.

http://www.ias.org.uk/factsheets/crime.htm

Originally posted by Slick
That's what's dangerous about cannabis though, it is perfectly fine and safe in the short term, so people try it, they then find they like it and gradually get into a routine of having it regularly. Only then after the user has been using for some time does the proper damage occur. This is why more people use cannabis than say heroin, with heroin you can die from trying it once, but with cannabis there's no danger of that. You may think it's a bit extreme comparing these 2 drugs but I was watching a program on cannabis psychosis once and there were doctors on it who said long term cannabis use is far worse on the brain than long term heroin use. [/B]

Heroin is perfectly safe. You cannot die from a properly administered dose of heroin. Heroin is safer than paracetamol. This is fact. The impurites of street-heroin are what make it dangerous, not the heroin itself. Morphine is sometimes injected into babies if they are born with breathing difficulties. Heroin also has no known long-term psychological effects. Again, this is fact. It can induce chronic dependence on people that use it, but it does not damage them psychologically.

I agree that long term cannabis use has the potential to affect people psychologically, but I do not believe that it is of the level where it should be made illegal by the government. Alcohol is directly linked with depression, but we are allowed to drink alcohol.

Ultimately I am of the opinion that we should be educated to a level where we have the objective facts about drugs and then allowed to make the choice by ourselves. I have a couple of friends that were committed to mental homes on account of LSD abuse. I firmly believe that proper education about LSD (i.e. not some GCSE level copper telling anecdotal stories about pink dragons) might have prevented this.

I dont think the current system is working. I think it needs addressing. I think the place to start is a pragmatic and educated approach, and I firmly believe that illegalisation is not the way to go about it.

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
If eaten, I do not think that cannabis is as dangerous long term as alcohol, both for the user and the people around them. Hundreds of thousands of people die from alcohol related disease every year. In terms of the effect on society:

http://www.ias.org.uk/factsheets/crime.htm

Heroin is perfectly safe. You cannot die from a properly administered dose of heroin. Heroin is safer than paracetamol. This is fact. The impurites of street-heroin are what make it dangerous, not the heroin itself. Morphine is sometimes injected into babies if they are born with breathing difficulties. Heroin also has no known long-term psychological effects. Again, this is fact. It can induce chronic dependence on people that use it, but it does not damage them psychologically.

I agree that long term cannabis use has the potential to affect people psychologically, but I do not believe that it is of the level where it should be made illegal by the government. Alcohol is directly linked with depression, but we are allowed to drink alcohol.

Ultimately I am of the opinion that we should be educated to a level where we have the objective facts about drugs and then allowed to make the choice by ourselves. I have a couple of friends that were committed to mental homes on account of LSD abuse. I firmly believe that proper education about LSD (i.e. not some GCSE level copper telling anecdotal stories about pink dragons) might have prevented this.

I dont think the current system is working. I think it needs addressing. I think the place to start is a pragmatic and educated approach, and I firmly believe that illegalisation is not the way to go about it.

Your argument is flawed. You seem to assume that everyone in this country is as clever, as educated, as informed and as sensible as you when it comes to decision making. You are mistaken. You have to allow for the lowest common denominator. The stupidest of the stupid, the youngest of the young and the oldest of the old. I have seen kids as young as (my estimate) 5 smoking cigarettes in the street. These kids can't make an informed and educated decision on whether they want to smoke or not. At 13-15 people become experimental with drink, drugs etc and it is at this time that people become addicted to cigarettes, drink and drugs. As an adult you can see the dangers of these things and decide which of them to use and which not to.
Children can't, they don't have the experience to make these decisions.

[CrapshoT]

Originally posted by fondie
amen! i do agree it should be available for medical purposes though for those for which other treatments don't work.

alternatively, my preffered solution would be to legalise it but ban smoking in public all together (weed and standard ciggies) and then have the NHS refuse to treat smokers for any conditions that are likely caused from smoking and suggest they take private healthcare instead. lets people who want to smoke do so if they want, but means they pay for their habit themselves, rather than have them share the cost with me. (as unfortunately this will never happen i'm sticking with banning it all together, 'cos i'm tight and i'd rather have people's freedom to smoke impinged upon than for me to pay their medical bills).

and how about we do the same for all the alcohol drinkers eh
say give everyone entering a hospital a breath test before hand and if they fail dont let them in cos a hell of alot of hospital intakes are alcohol related or howabout ban the sale of paracetamol {which is a far more dangerous drug than cannabis} to take away their self inflicted pain how many celebs etc do we see addicted to painkillers? yet lowly cannibis a naturely growing"herb" is the one that is persecuted not to mention all the Kiddies alcopops that are getting pushed at the minute
when you drink alcohol your liver uses 90% of its resources cleaning the toxants out of your blood that come with the alcohol so as soon as you start drinking your liver ceases to work properly so now the liver is only working at 10% efficiency meaning the rest of your body to suffer it cant function properly so this leads to things like beer bellys fat just gets dumped in the quickest place so people put on weight etc etc...
get a life people as long as the choice is yours and you dont have to use it why persecute it!!!
so smokers have no rights to the nhs cos we smoke its not as if we dont make a contribution do dont we pay over £3 tax on a box of 20 lol got its getting childish now so im gonna stop

[DaBeeeenster]

Sounds to me like you are confusing bad parenting with cannabis legalisation...

Oops, I was referrng to BR's post...

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
Sounds to me like you are confusing bad parenting with cannabis legalisation...

Oops, I was referrng to BR's post...

Because parents know where their kids are and EXACTLY what they're doing all the time?

Kids do what kids do, giving them something else to do is just stupid imo.

[SIRUS]

ive been smoking weed on / off for over 15 years i see no side affects from this as for being addictive i think its more down to the person not the drug
i smoke when im out drinking it keeps me more in control and aware whats happening around me
legalise it i say its not gonna stop others so why not just do the decent thing atleast then we should get better quality weed as well not this rubbish we are so use to
just my 2p

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
Because parents know where their kids are and EXACTLY what they're doing all the time?

Kids do what kids do, giving them something else to do is just stupid imo.

Right, because drug dealers only sell to over eighteens, dont they

So the choice is license it and make sure that it's only sold to over eighteens, or let drug dealers sell it to anyone. Er...

[Saracen]

Originally posted by Del Lardo
Well if I remember correctly the recommended max daily intake is about 10 units.

I'm afraid you don't remember correctly.

The maximum weekly recommended units were 14 units for women and 21 units for men. This comes from the British Medical Association Board of Science and Education, and a report from the Royal College of General Practitioners, and the Royal College of Physicians and Psychiatrists concurs.

It is echoed by the Department of Health in their "Sensible Drinking - The Report of an Inter-Departmental Working Group" and is, so far as I can discover, current Government advice. A google on that phrase will bring up the full report in a PDF but be prepared for about 90 pages of heavy text and statistics

For reference, a unit of alcohol is 8 grams, which is equivalent to the amount found in half a pint of ordinary beer, a small glass of wine or a standard measure of spirits.

[Punky]

heyhey kiddo's! just got in from amsterdam, one guess how i spent most of my week.... coffeeshops are amazing, a nice, safe, friendly place to smoke weed and generally relax. it's a hell of a lot better than having to buy it off some dodgy geezer round the back of B&Q or whatever. the uk needs coffeeshops!

[tonicblue]

If it was done in that way but there were laws like drinking against it I think it would be ok. I think, like drinking, there should be a driving limit and the usual.

[Zak33]

I have voted to legailise it. There can be no doubt about this one in my mind. And a recent (last weekend) even tells me why.

Was at Sairs parents, having a BBQ, and they have a large wall......behind which is a public playing field....and at about 4:30 a group of yound lads sat down, leaning on Sairs parents wall, sparked up a couple of joints and mellowed.

And its that, that tells me it should be legailised.....cos when I was their age and was drinking scotch or wine or beer or whatever I could get hold of, I got lary, and loud, and would have caused a lot more grief than they did...

they giggled a while, the language was ripe (I never take offense at that) and then they wandered off.

It was a win win deal. They werre happy, we weren't offended, nothing was damaged, no one got loud.....

Alcohol would have made a big bad difference...so to me....LEGALISE it.....in fact, get the stuff grown, and processed properly and let company's make a profit on it, and the goverment can tax it and that will pay for the Casualty Units to stitch up the drunken fools from down at the Pub

[Slick]

But those are the short term effects, how do you know 5 years down the line they won't have crippled their brains from using it? Also (I presume they're under 18) if it was legalised, they wouldn't be able to get hold of it as it would be strictly distibuted to over 18s, they then might try to use harder drugs as a substitute.

[Knoxville]

How do you know that 5 years down the line they will? if they're occaisional users then it might not cause huge amounts of damage. and it doesn't matter what age restriction they slap on it theres always ways around it how many people on these boards alone are under 18 and go out drinking, why use harder drugs as a substitute when you can get your older brother/mate/whatever to go get you some.