Should Cannabis be legalised?

[coventrygull]

Bring back the mushrooms

 

[griff9]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMM_T_PJ0Rs

found this thread, reminded me of that clip

 

[Castello]

Personally, with the exception of skunk, I would support decriminalisation and allow a small amount around 15 gms/ half an ounce for personal possession, with certain controlled shops where it can be legally bought in small quantities. Much like the Netherlands. From there full legalisatoon should be considered on the basis of how that goes. It becopmes a balance between the benefits of collecting extra tax against the added cost to the NHS.

However I do think there are some myths repeated here that need to be addressed honestly in any debate.

- Cannabis is less dangerous than cigarettes is not true. ounce for ounce Cannabis contains approximately 10 times as much tar and nicotine as tobacco. now clearly you dont smoke as much cannabis as tobacco, but it still will have all teh associated effects of tobacco.

- cannabis leads to schizophrenia. there may or may not be truth in this. As most people know the main active ingredient in Cannabis is THC (Tetrahydrocannabinol). This is know to induce psychotic episodes. Less well known is another active ingredient is CBD (cannabidiol) this is also used in medicatikon used to counter schizophrenia. Generally it seems one would counter teh other. However skunk is bred to raise the THC content and lower the CBD content. This is why skunk is so dangerous.

Furthermore studies have shown that schizophrenia is more common amongst cannabis users aged under 21 than amongst non cannabis users aged under 21.

The same study shows no difference in occurence amongst users aged over 21 than non users over 21.

This could be the effect of cannabis on the developing brain. It could also of course be the fact that teenagers are more inclined to go for the stronger high of skunk.

Consequently although i'd decriminalise cannabis i would make chemically enhanced forms such as skunk a class A drug.

 

[philsussex]

Of course.

Quality controlled and taxable.

Definitely legalise it.

 

[The Spanish]

Of course.

Quality controlled and taxable.

Definitely legalise it.

Sorry every time this comes up it cracks me up and makes me think of Saltdean's own weed martyr.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1707336.potsmokers_pane_over_wages_for_windows/

 

[happypig]

Occasionally I get asked to sign search warrants. It's quite usual to ask questions of the officer requesting it.
I remember one that was requested for a drugs warrant, I asked him "how confident are you in the quality of your information" and he replied "Oh pretty sure, the beat officer saw the cannabis plant growing on his windowsill"

As for legalising it, I've seen far more people whose lives are in ruin through alcohol. I'm not sure that legalisation is the answer but OTOH, prohibition hasn't been very successful either. I'd like to see a reasoned and intelligent debate about it.

 

[griff9]

Personally, with the exception of skunk, I would support decriminalisation and allow a small amount around 15 gms/ half an ounce for personal possession, with certain controlled shops where it can be legally bought in small quantities. Much like the Netherlands. From there full legalisatoon should be considered on the basis of how that goes. It becopmes a balance between the benefits of collecting extra tax against the added cost to the NHS.

However I do think there are some myths repeated here that need to be addressed honestly in any debate.

- Cannabis is less dangerous than cigarettes is not true. ounce for ounce Cannabis contains approximately 10 times as much tar and nicotine as tobacco. now clearly you dont smoke as much cannabis as tobacco, but it still will have all teh associated effects of tobacco.

- cannabis leads to schizophrenia. there may or may not be truth in this. As most people know the main active ingredient in Cannabis is THC (Tetrahydrocannabinol). This is know to induce psychotic episodes. Less well known is another active ingredient is CBD (cannabidiol) this is also used in medicatikon used to counter schizophrenia. Generally it seems one would counter teh other. However skunk is bred to raise the THC content and lower the CBD content. This is why skunk is so dangerous.

Furthermore studies have shown that schizophrenia is more common amongst cannabis users aged under 21 than amongst non cannabis users aged under 21.

The same study shows no difference in occurence amongst users aged over 21 than non users over 21.

This could be the effect of cannabis on the developing brain. It could also of course be the fact that teenagers are more inclined to go for the stronger high of skunk.

Consequently although i'd decriminalise cannabis i would make chemically enhanced forms such as skunk a class A drug.

yeah i agree to an extent that skunk is a lot more dangerous and if cannabis was made available in smalll amounts then they'd have to do something about the skunk strains flooding everywhere cus it doesn't mix with people well.. but the fact is at the moment skunk is reasonably rare because most stuff flooding the streets is grown for the money and not the love of the plant... its out the door as quickly as possible and its generally quite hard to get real skunk all the time... the demand for impeccably grown hydroponic skunk at a reasonable price far out weighs the supply for it at the current time, but that could all change if we did legalise it, this is my only concern about legalising it really, but its easily beatable.

 

[KneeOn]

Some one said earlier it weed is a "victimless" 'crime'...

Right now its definately not victimless. That kid who you get your weed off, gets it from some one else, who gets it from someone else who gets it from a distributer who has his weed growing funded by gangs who are able to fund the weed with things such as child prostitution, murder, abduction, rape, fraud.

Although legalizing it will bring down the amount of crimes that are comitted funding this trade legalizing one drug isn't legalizing them all. All this victimless crime bullshit, Heroin, E, MDMA, Cocaine et al are all funded in the same way.

Just a point that right now the demand requires a supply and the suppliers are committing henous crimes to give you your spliff.

EDIT: I'm not a user, i've never smoked or touched a drug in my life. I like a drink though. Loads of my friends have done drugs ranging from Cannabis to MDMA to Extacy.

I don't really mind what people do with their lives and probably would legalize cannabis.

I just think saying that right now its victimless is a lot of ignorance.

 

[Solid at the back]

i would be so happy if they did legalise it

 

[beorhthelm]

- Cannabis is less dangerous than cigarettes is not true. ounce for ounce Cannabis contains approximately 10 times as much tar and nicotine as tobacco.

im pretty certain there is no nicotine in Cannabis. not sure about tar, though if you take cannabis through eating or a bong, it becomes irrelevant. iirc, reefers are claimed to contain more of some substances due to the inclusion of tobacco and no filter.

i've also wondered where this mythology around skunk comes from. its not a new thing, its was around 15 years ago and im pretty shure it was old then. so its a stonger version? it needs to be treated as such, not elevated to the level of heroin and crack. how would legislation work that seperated them, is the bobby who pulls you in the street going to pull out a pocket lab to analyse which form of cannabis is in front of him?

Some one said earlier it weed is a "victimless" 'crime'...

Right now its definately not victimless. That kid who you get your weed off, gets it from some one else, who gets it from someone else who gets it from a distributer who has his weed growing funded by gangs who are able to fund the weed with things such as child prostitution, murder, abduction, rape, fraud.

you dont need to fund growing weed with prostitution and all that. some illegal immigration and smuggling (obviously) are probably the main crimes up the supply chain. consider how supply chains work, the chap or gang growing and importing cannabis is not necessaily going to be growing and importing heroin. they are different product with different requirements. just like milk, tomatos and baked beans dont come from the same producer to Tesco.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

As someone who used to smoke quite a lot of dope, I would not legalise it. Legality shouldn't be based on whether people want to do it, but on the affects is causes to themselves and others. Based on my own experience, I would say it definitely caused me minor problems with concentration, moodiness etc, over the years.

Can't say I regret doing it, but I would not get into it again.

There should be more/better help for addicts of any drug though, and that may include legally prescribing the drug in a controlled way, as long as the help to get off it is going on at the same time. Of source, numbers-wise alcohol is worse, but that's a completely different argument.

 

[Don Quixote]

It should be legalised, but if you legalise it you really have to legalise Ketamine and MDMA too.