[News] Canada legalises recreational cannabis use.

[beorhthelm]

I bet you like Marmite don't you? Bleedin' deviant!

i used to like peanut butter and marmite together. i dont know either, sounds horrid now.

 

[daveinprague]

I mean hard core illegal drugs. I am not lecturing others. I am simply debating whether in my humble opinion, the government should legalise it. They have to balance what is the right message to send to the whole population. They have additional priorities to consider such as the impact on publicly funded organisations.

My own position for myself and my family are my own choice. I have a friend who has smoked it and I openly disagree with it but accept his right to behave in accordance with his own choices. It is a natural respect that he would not behave that way in front of me as then I would no longer seek any such persons companionship.

How do you legislate against nature? Its a plant!

 

[beorhthelm]

How do you legislate against nature? Its a plant!

you're repeating yourself, Dave, thats ok the drug do that, a chemical reaction in your brain cause you to forget what you are saying

(paraphrasing TheStreets, The Irony of it all)

 

[btnbelle]

Ok. So clearly the message that is currently being sent by the government is that marajuana is a hard-core drug. As the negative impacts of the drug are provably less than that of tobacco and alcohol, both of which are not considered to be 'hard-core drugs', marajuana is therefore not a hard-core drug, and the government needs to legalise it in order to send the right message.

Keeping it illegal would send the wrong message to the population, and I'm sure you would agree that is not on.

Legalising it of course in no way compels you or your family to smoke it, and you can continue to make that choice. I for example choose not to eat peanut butter because I hate the damn stuff, and ensure that my family don't either so I can avoid the smell in my own home.

It being illegal sets a boundary for parents to give their children. As far as I can see those who use it privately are not chased by the law. But if you were annoying others with the foul smelling smoke, they could make a complaint. The right balance from my prospective.

 

[btnbelle]

How do you legislate against nature? Its a plant!

The law has been made already. Yes it is a plant but smoking it is a chosen action which is not lawful.

 

[jameswestport]

Fair play to them. Hope the UK and Ireland follow suit soon.

 

[Brovion]

The law has been made already. Yes it is a plant but smoking it is a chosen action which is not lawful.

So? Don't you think laws should change as society changes? All sorts of things are allowed now that used to be prohibited, from gay marriage to women being allowed to vote.

 

[BBassic]

It being illegal sets a boundary for parents to give their children. As far as I can see those who use it privately are not chased by the law. But if you were annoying others with the foul smelling smoke, they could make a complaint. The right balance from my prospective.

I'm not a parent so excuse my naivete but setting boundaries for kids is something parents do regardless of legality isn't it? Using alcohol as the closest comparison I was told I was not allowed to drink until I was old enough but that didn't stop me.

Point I'm trying to make is that whether something is legal or not the parent sets the boundary and the kid decides if they want to push it or toe it.

Again, I'm not a parent and I'm not (intentionally) having a dig; just curious to get your view on it as a parent.

 

[Brovion]

I'm not a parent so excuse my naivete but setting boundaries for kids is something parents do regardless of legality isn't it? Using alcohol as the closest comparison I was told I was not allowed to drink until I was old enough but that didn't stop me.

Point I'm trying to make is that whether something is legal or not the parent sets the boundary and the kid decides if they want to push it or toe it.

Again, I'm not a parent and I'm not (intentionally) having a dig; just curious to get your view on it as a parent.

No, you're spot on. Setting boundaries has nothing to do with legality. It's not illegal for children to sit on their own in their rooms watching television and/or playing computer games from the moment they get home from school until midnight - but no responsible parent would allow that.

 

[StonehamPark]

A lot of ignorance to dismantle here.

Just say no to drugs is the best and safest way forward.

In your uneducated (on this matter), and inexperienced opinion.
Are you aware of the social structures before alcohol was around, and what people used to consume instead (and the positive consequences)?

My understanding is that it is higher than cigarettes, 13 times higher risk. Not sure where I heard it now but think it was an medical expert on tv.

It is also a higher risk than your current lifestyle.

Your understanding is absolutely terrible. Do your own research.

No I don't drink coffee. Far too dangerous for me.....

My daughter had a great time at university.

They prefer to enjoy life with vigor instead of sitting around and being stoned.

A ridiculous stereotype that can be attached to anything; food, alcohol, cigarettes, video games, films, music.

I am simply debating whether in my humble opinion, the government should legalise it.

As stated previously, your opinion is extremely misguided and inaccurate.
You would do very well to do your own unbiased research and think for yourself.

I can only assume that you consume the majority of your news and information from scare-mongering newspapers.

People like you are dangerous, because if you are given the opportunity to vote on something that could impact many lives, you might cast your vote without being properly informed and educated about the subject, and make a very bad decision.

.
.
.
.
.
.

Oh and I voted for Brexit.

 

[btnbelle]

So? Don't you think laws should change as society changes? All sorts of things are allowed now that used to be prohibited, from gay marriage to women being allowed to vote.

Of course law can change. It is my opinion the it does not need to be so for cannabis. People can still smoke it without be overt and making it common place thus putting parents who wish to give their children a different set of morals the ability to parent the way they wish too.

 

[btnbelle]

I'm not a parent so excuse my naivete but setting boundaries for kids is something parents do regardless of legality isn't it? Using alcohol as the closest comparison I was told I was not allowed to drink until I was old enough but that didn't stop me.

Point I'm trying to make is that whether something is legal or not the parent sets the boundary and the kid decides if they want to push it or toe it.

Again, I'm not a parent and I'm not (intentionally) having a dig; just curious to get your view on it as a parent.

Yes you are right. It is normal for children to test boundaries. As babies they need unconditional love. Terrible two's and three's are for boundary setting. From four to early teens they are normally well behaved although you can get the odd problem when they mix with their peers. Ie. a swear word (ok as an adult, but not nice when a six year old speaks it) Teenagers are the greatest challenge. They need space to break the rules if they choose. Both mine did on occasions. The consequences of that taught them right from wrong and they both had a greater respect for the values set as a result of that style. I had family members look at me with disdain for my approach. But they are better adults because I didn't shout them down and gave them space to learn.

The law assists parents by showing a boundary.

 

[Wrong-Direction]

A lot of ignorance to dismantle here.



In your uneducated (on this matter), and inexperienced opinion.
Are you aware of the social structures before alcohol was around, and what people used to consume instead (and the positive consequences)?



Your understanding is absolutely terrible. Do your own research.








[emoji2]



A ridiculous stereotype that can be attached to anything; food, alcohol, cigarettes, video games, films, music.



As stated previously, your opinion is extremely misguided and inaccurate.
You would do very well to do your own unbiased research and think for yourself.

I can only assume that you consume the majority of your news and information from scare-mongering newspapers.

People like you are dangerous, because if you are given the opportunity to vote on something that could impact many lives, you might cast your vote without being properly informed and educated about the subject, and make a very bad decision.

.
.
.
.
.
.

Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk

 

[Brovion]

Of course law can change. It is my opinion the it does not need to be so for cannabis. People can still smoke it without be overt and making it common place thus putting parents who wish to give their children a different set of morals the ability to parent the way they wish too.

Your other post gave the impression that once laws are made - that's it. So at least you acknowledge that society and attitudes change, which is precisely what's happening here.

Your point about 'smoking without being overt' is interesting. Rather than your solution of just turning a blind eye to people who break the law in private; what if it were legalised, but a stipulation was that you couldn't smoke in public? (A bit like the way normal smoking is going). You'd have your wish, no overt smoking, but people who choose to smoke wouldn't be contemptuously ignoring the law of the land.

 

[btnbelle]

A lot of ignorance to dismantle here.



In your uneducated (on this matter), and inexperienced opinion.
Are you aware of the social structures before alcohol was around, and what people used to consume instead (and the positive consequences)?



Your understanding is absolutely terrible. Do your own research.












A ridiculous stereotype that can be attached to anything; food, alcohol, cigarettes, video games, films, music.



As stated previously, your opinion is extremely misguided and inaccurate.
You would do very well to do your own unbiased research and think for yourself.

I can only assume that you consume the majority of your news and information from scare-mongering newspapers.

People like you are dangerous, because if you are given the opportunity to vote on something that could impact many lives, you might cast your vote without being properly informed and educated about the subject, and make a very bad decision.

.
.
.
.
.
.

I was not debating alcohol.

I have formed an opinion that I am happy with. I don't need to do further research.

It was not a stereotype, just personal experience of the way it happened for them. A situation they chose to withdraw from.

I don't read newspapers. I mainly consume my news from BBC news online and on TV.

My education comes from medical experts on TV which backs my upbringing, chosen belief and that of the way I have parented my own children.

 

[StonehamPark]

I was not debating alcohol.

Obviously. I asked you what your opinion was of inebriation pre-alcohol within the human race.

I have formed an opinion that I am happy with. I don't need to do further research.

Shows your absolute ignorance. Can you imagine where humanity would be today if Scientists and forward thinkers shared that insane view?

It was not a stereotype, just personal experience of the way it happened for them.

A stereotype or a blanket statement, that's the way it was written.

I don't read newspapers. I mainly consume my news from BBC news online and on TV.

Where did you get the information which formed your views on pro-Brexit?

My education comes from medical experts on TV

 

[btnbelle]

Your other post gave the impression that once laws are made - that's it. So at least you acknowledge that society and attitudes change, which is precisely what's happening here.

Your point about 'smoking without being overt' is interesting. Rather than your solution of just turning a blind eye to people who break the law in private; what if it were legalised, but a stipulation was that you couldn't smoke in public? (A bit like the way normal smoking is going). You'd have your wish, no overt smoking, but people who choose to smoke wouldn't be contemptuously ignoring the law of the land.

This would not give a legal boundary to use for parenting. For me the law is correct and operates well. Politicians have much better subjects to debate.

When we move boundaries there are always those who flout them. So keep the law and let those who wish to smoke it continue in private. Many parents would not want their children to witness it. Also there is the foul smell and I don't want to breathe in the second hand smoke.

 

[daveinprague]

you're repeating yourself, Dave, thats ok the drug do that, a chemical reaction in your brain cause you to forget what you are saying

(paraphrasing TheStreets, The Irony of it all)

Repeated because clearly the poster is not listening.

 

[daveinprague]

The law has been made already. Yes it is a plant but smoking it is a chosen action which is not lawful.

The reason that marijuana was made illegal was...?
I mean really. What on earth is so bad? Its been used effectively for pleasure and medicine for thousands of years.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

It being illegal sets a boundary for parents to give their children. As far as I can see those who use it privately are not chased by the law. But if you were annoying others with the foul smelling smoke, they could make a complaint. The right balance from my prospective.

It is a very tricky boundary for me as a parent though, because I want to bring them up as law-abiding but I would also be encouraging them to break the law by extolling the virtues of cannabis. I am currently a law-abiding citizen except for this one thing where I break the law.

So again, keeping it illegal sets the wrong message and hopefully the government will rectify this one day