Agree, does raise some questions about agenda!!!Weird bounce on a 3 year old thread. Also a weird account, created 5 years ago but only has 4 posts in the last week
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] How would you vote in a referendum to legalise cannabis in the UK?
- Thread starter GingerBeerMan
- Start date
BrightonCottager
Well-known member
Isn't it legalised by default anyway, at least in Brighton? I can't go out without smelling skunk - more than in Portugal - where it really IS legal?
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,216
- Thread starter
- #183
Isn't it decriminalised in Portugal? Quite a big difference to being legal.
But can we have it so that people don't stink the place out?
Going against the nsc tide, no.
Personally know four people badly affected by it, serious problems meaning that three of them won’t for the rest of their many decades function i.e. get out of serious mental ill health that came after smoking weed, they won‘t work, pay for their own way in life. It’s not the modern high strength weed, the older person had his brain frazzled by the mid 1980’s.
We’ve seen how epidemics of addiction spread with legalization …. booze and the new curse vapes.
I’d rather the status quo, where determined folk still get their fix and the police de facto leave them alone.
Personally know four people badly affected by it, serious problems meaning that three of them won’t for the rest of their many decades function i.e. get out of serious mental ill health that came after smoking weed, they won‘t work, pay for their own way in life. It’s not the modern high strength weed, the older person had his brain frazzled by the mid 1980’s.
We’ve seen how epidemics of addiction spread with legalization …. booze and the new curse vapes.
I’d rather the status quo, where determined folk still get their fix and the police de facto leave them alone.
Last edited:
- Feb 22, 2014
- 2,870
I cannot think of any instance in history where prohibition has ever worked. Tell people you can’t have something and they will find a way. It’s been illegal for donkey years and it’s more available than ever, Ban it, make it illegal, it hasn’t worked. What it has done is make a lot of people loads of money. I understand that most of the cocaine money ends up in HSBC, Barclays etc.As always, follow the money.
chip
Well-known member
The US has collected $19bn in taxes (for the states where it's legal), so it can definitely work financially."raise untold taxes"
Therein lies the problem IMO. If it is taxed highly, then the illegal market will still persist as it would still be cheaper. We see illegal alcohol and tobacco sales because governments impose so high duty / taxation rates.
Tobacco Products Duty rates
www.gov.uk
What would be the point of legalisation only to impose tax and duty rates that would make it unaffordable compared to illegal sources? You are just back to square one; people would buy from illegal sources because it would be cheaper.
Van Cleef
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2023
- 867
I think rippleman was commenting specifically on some views that see legalisation as a tax bonanza. Any tax rate would have to be set very carefully to avoid the illegal supply framework undercutting the legal supply, which leaves us back at square 1. If the US is picking up decent tax returns it appears that they have pitched it sensibly.
nevergoagain
Well-known member
I'd have to vote yes just because I spent a lot of my time as a youth enjoying it immensely. That said I think there ought to still be some limits. The strength of the skunk varieties now does concern me, there's really no need for it to be like that.
- Mar 23, 2023
- 2,226
If I go to a pub and order a beer I know the strength, if drugs were the same then there would be a lot lesss harm.
Personally I’m on the side of legalising all drugs but if we don’t then alcohol should also be banned.
Isn’t fair to have one rule for some and another for everything else
Personally I’m on the side of legalising all drugs but if we don’t then alcohol should also be banned.
Isn’t fair to have one rule for some and another for everything else
So you know that the illegal supply has been eliminated then?
- Oct 12, 2022
- 2,798
You’ve got that speed analogy the wrong way round. To be a fair analogy, at present driving would be completely banned at any speed, all driving would be illegal, and what’s being proposed as a change would be state permitted driving with rules and regulations in place.
There are simple saliva tests that show whether an individual is currently intoxicated, and I would argue that you would need at least eight hours to be certain of not being intoxicated, but would bow to experienced pharmacologists superior knowledge.
GingerBeerMan
3-0
- Dec 29, 2011
- 8,216
- Thread starter
- #196
In Canada the legal supply FAR outweighs the illegal supply. Once weed is legalised the production cost plummets to a level where even a 20% tax makes legal weed cheaper than illegal weed. This is because economies of scale means it's cheaper to produce weed legally then illegally. Anyone growing weed illegally on a scale that can compete on price with the legal growers are easy to identify and shut down.
- Oct 12, 2022
- 2,798
I’m the same, alternatively ban alcohol and caffeine too, if we’re going for a world free of intoxicants and stimulants. None of this cherry-picking bullshit.
So the answer is no then! Legal alcohol in this country far outweighs illegal hooch but it is not eliminated. With weed, what strength level would be legal? And there would still be the illegal trade for stuff stronger.
Taken from this site. https://drugdrivingsolicitors.co.uk/how-long-after-smoking-weed-can-i-drive/
Again, this isn’t a foolproof calculation as the half-life will be affected by the amount of THC you take and also your physical characteristics, such as your height and weight. Waiting at least 12 hours should be enough if you’ve consumed around 120 micrograms of THC, but it’s best to wait at least 24 hours if you want to be safe.