Why is Cannabis still illegal?
Discussion
Halb said:
It’s the government who make it illegal
OK I get that. But how does making it legal alter the harmful effects it has on individuals. We hear a lot on here that it’s all someone else’s fault which seems to be the excuse for personal use, along with deflecting the argument to alcohol/a n other non banned substance. Making it legal seems high on the agenda for those who use it but to enable them to get it easier/less guilt/cheaper etc and frankly therefore only looking after themselves.
So, how does making it legal help those that can’t handle it/become psychotic/would become psychotic if it was easily and cheaply available?
These are genuine questions
technodup said:
V6 Pushfit said:
So, how does making it legal help those that can’t handle it/become psychotic/would become psychotic if it was easily and cheaply available?
Being illegal doesn't stop people taking it or a minority suffering those effects.Being legal would provide revenue to treat those who suffer those effects.
Blue Oval84 said:
Quality and strength of the product would be regulated. No more head-f
k strength weed (unless clearly labelled as such), a range of varieties to choose from etc. It's even more important with things like ecstasy and coke. Virtually every Ecstasy related death seems to be linked to the pills being much stronger than expected (stuff on the market now is much stronger than 20 years ago) Coke wouldn't be cut with weedkiller etc.
Legalisation would fix all of this.
Legalisation would set a price which would have tax added. How does that stop the bootleggers undercutting/black market?k strength weed (unless clearly labelled as such), a range of varieties to choose from etc. It's even more important with things like ecstasy and coke. Virtually every Ecstasy related death seems to be linked to the pills being much stronger than expected (stuff on the market now is much stronger than 20 years ago) Coke wouldn't be cut with weedkiller etc.Legalisation would fix all of this.
Blue Oval84 said:
Short of taking the pills and finding out, is it feasible to test them for MDMA content easily or does that require lab work?
No it's piss easy and can be done in minutes. Several festivals requested permission to have testing stations this year but we're denied by the home officetechnodup said:
V6 Pushfit said:
OK noted. Any others?
What do you want exactly? What we have now obviously doesn't work. How does perpetuating that failure help anyone? We surely have to try a different approach, and it's staring us in the face.Colorado took £250m in tax last year. Population 5m. We've got 60m+. As they say over there, do the math.
Between tax and police savings the benefit will be in the billions. Which will pay for the ones who fall through the cracks, and then some.
And I don't use it btw. Or anything else.
Which sounds to me like grasping at straws and not really something a cannabis user would really care about, unless of course using that hobby-horse reason meant their habit carried less guilt or criminality.
V6 Pushfit said:
Legalisation would set a price which would have tax added. How does that stop the bootleggers undercutting/black market?
For the same reason the vast majority of people buy booze from pubs, offys and supermarkets and not moonshine out the back of a van! I don't use anything but IMO the case for legalisation of weed and ecstasy is overwhelming, probably coke too. The reasons for legalising seem to be very thin/non tangible or are related to bringing in government revenue - which is a proxy argument because it is the last thing a user is actually bothered about.
This is far more vital as far as I can see:
‘... the risk of psychosis was five times higher for people who smoked such cannabis every day compared with non-users’....
Particularly affecting the young - from:
Cannabis: What are the risks of recreational use? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44532417
Let’s be honest: users want less guilt and shame etc and the rest can go to hell in a hand cart.
This is far more vital as far as I can see:
‘... the risk of psychosis was five times higher for people who smoked such cannabis every day compared with non-users’....
Particularly affecting the young - from:
Cannabis: What are the risks of recreational use? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44532417
Let’s be honest: users want less guilt and shame etc and the rest can go to hell in a hand cart.
I must add that I have no problem with its use as-is but it’s the widening out to all and sundry and to make it available in the laps of people who would previously never have found/bothered to find a supplier which is far more likely to have devastating effects on a much wider society.
Pacman1978 said:
Typical, the last 25 minutes of tapping out a reply has been all for nowt.. Stupid touchscreen bullocks..
In short, no, cannabis consumption for recreational purposes isn't a smart move. Since 1998, I've had at least one stint (anything up to 16 weeks per time) as an inpatient at an NHS acute mental health unit. It's blindingly obvious that cannabis is the most common cause for admission.
Seeing the effects that it causes is very saddening. I'm all for legalisation of medical forms of cannabis. Even making it legal will not work, buying government approved instead of thc laden dealer sourced is never going to happen.
The powers that be have truly missed the boat and ballsed up any chance of a working solution.
I am unsure as to the science of cannabis, but is it correct in saying that it's the thc content that gets you high? Minus thc, can a high still be got another way?
I agree with this 100% Its bang on. Through work I have been in dozens of NHS and Private MH Units in the last three years and the consultants all say exactly the same - the acute admissions are largely due to cannabis use.In short, no, cannabis consumption for recreational purposes isn't a smart move. Since 1998, I've had at least one stint (anything up to 16 weeks per time) as an inpatient at an NHS acute mental health unit. It's blindingly obvious that cannabis is the most common cause for admission.
Seeing the effects that it causes is very saddening. I'm all for legalisation of medical forms of cannabis. Even making it legal will not work, buying government approved instead of thc laden dealer sourced is never going to happen.
The powers that be have truly missed the boat and ballsed up any chance of a working solution.
I am unsure as to the science of cannabis, but is it correct in saying that it's the thc content that gets you high? Minus thc, can a high still be got another way?
Still, there's no stopping 'the waters fine come on in' view and 'what about alcohol' etc etc etc. So at the end of the day there's little to be gained on either side from further discussion, except that the anti cannabis side are more likely to advise non-users not to try it which can only be for the good.
Blue Oval84 said:
And you still claim that the reasons are flimsy?
Saving potentially hundreds if not thousands of lives through consistent strength drugs (relevant more to Coke, Heroin and Ecstasy I admit), improved mental health (definitely relevant to weed due to weaker strains becoming profitable), massive tax take, huge cuts to black market incomes, and massive freeing up of Police time? All of which are more or less beyond any doubt, and those sound flimsy?
I regard very little of what you have said as being hard evidence. The pro cannabis lobby appears to be peddling a load of old tosh at max PR to get their weed declassified, then probably still buy it on the black market as it’ll be cheaper and stronger than government stamped stuff and no one can pull you up on it any more. Forget about the kids, the mental issues and the lives changed as long as you’re ok then the con worked. The black market won’t die anyone who says it will is living in cuckoo land.Saving potentially hundreds if not thousands of lives through consistent strength drugs (relevant more to Coke, Heroin and Ecstasy I admit), improved mental health (definitely relevant to weed due to weaker strains becoming profitable), massive tax take, huge cuts to black market incomes, and massive freeing up of Police time? All of which are more or less beyond any doubt, and those sound flimsy?
That’s where I stand. Rail into the wind if you like but it’s about bloody time someone said no.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff