Why is Cannabis still illegal?
Discussion
Elatino1 said:
1602Mark said:
Elatino1 said:
"The evil stuff" 
It's a plant.
So are Poppies. It's a plant.
geeks said:
Lannister902 said:
Elatino1 said:
172 said:
Every single cannabis smoker I know is struggling to get ahead in life
Read into that what ever you like
Whereas I don't know one that isn't doing reasonably well and a couple that are millionaires.Read into that what ever you like
Read into that whatever you like.
I'm pro decriminalisation/taxation But doing so won't make cannabis side effect free wonder druglll
I made the original statement based on various people met through various channels not just "my mates"
Also granted construction work probably attracts the problem smokers but I run a small building company and do the hiring and training. It's obvious when someone is a heavy smoker.
If I was a smoker the drug driving limit is what I'd be worried about it's set so low that any daily user will be over the limit round the clock
Edited by 172 on Saturday 10th August 20:16
1602Mark said:
What, slitting the seed pod and scraping off the Opium gum that seeps out? No more effort than harvesting and drying weed.
Well yes it is more effort. Do we have a big opium problem? I was under the impression that heroin was the problem and that takes a lot of refining processes.HustleRussell said:
Derek Smith said:
The chap had won awards for his work, sometimes in areas where you'd need a spliff or two before taking risks.
Huh. Smoking ‘the evil stuff’ makes you more risk prone? Who knew...What about simply reducing anxiety.
Alcohol does exactly the same.....
I know friends and associates from school and its messed them up, anxiety, psychosis etc. What affects one person in a positive way doesent do the same trick for others. So it's still a risky drug. All drugs have their side effects, some more severe tha others. Not sure it worth putting an already pressurised nhs mental health system put under more pressure!?
Derek Smith said:
amusingduck said:
Derek Smith said:
I nicked one Fleet Street photographer for cannabis possession, enough, I felt, for intent to supply, but not in the opinion of my sergeant.
How much? I know someone who buys ounces at a time, just for himself!It was the chap's camera gear that had been left in a cab - he was a photographer for a big Fleet Street national!
This was in the days of FP4 35mm film and there were three rows of the black cassette containers, probably a dozen or so, attached by elastic. I only opened one and found the evil stuff. The rest were printed.
It had all looked perfectly normal. When the bloke turned up to reclaim his property (I'd phoned the paper) I gave him one of my looks, of which I had many, and his shoulders drooped. I took him to the cells and asked him to pull out all the containers with cannabis in them, which he duly did, after I told him he could have his cameras back. About eight were tightly packed with herbal.
I wanted to weigh them; there was more than one ounce in each container, but my sergeant knew who the chap was and asked my indulgence. I was easy. It was put down as 'A quantity for personal use'. The bloke gave a full and frank statement, we retained the cannabis, went to court the following day, got a conviction, remanded for reports, and the case went away. I got a look from the bench when I produced all the containers, I was a bit of a pain and used to nick a lot of minor offenders, and occasionally had a whole court day, apart from the over-nighters, put by for mine, so when I shrugged and smiled, they nodded it through.
It was put into the evidence store to be destroyed, in an unspecified way, later.
The chap had won awards for his work, sometimes in areas where you'd need a spliff or two before taking risks. I didn't know of him at the time, but I followed his work afterwards. He won some more awards and then just stopped.
t! I thought an ounce was a lot, and this guy is walking around with 8 in his bag 
He must have been chuffed with that result!
Elatino1 said:
1602Mark said:
What, slitting the seed pod and scraping off the Opium gum that seeps out? No more effort than harvesting and drying weed.
Well yes it is more effort. Do we have a big opium problem? I was under the impression that heroin was the problem and that takes a lot of refining processes.Back on topic, whilst there is certainly a case for legislation it brings its own problems. One being driving and users being twice as likely to be involved in a crash. THC-positive fatalities were younger, and more likely, single-vehicle accidents, nighttime crashes, and speeding. They were also less likely to be wearing seat belts or helmets.
- US National Library of Medicine*
PorkRind said:
I know friends and associates from school and its messed them up, anxiety, psychosis etc. What affects one person in a positive way doesent do the same trick for others. So it's still a risky drug. All drugs have their side effects, some more severe tha others. Not sure it worth putting an already pressurised nhs mental health system put under more pressure!?
I'm highly sceptical you know several people, all of whom have a causal relationship between smoking weed and their mental health issues. I think you just know people with mental health issues who smoke weed.Legalisation doesn't cause extra pressure on the NHS
Davos123 said:
Legalisation doesn't cause extra pressure on the NHS
I think I read it did in Canada? (Healthcare not NHS)ETA
The legalization of recreational marijuana in Colorado did have a significant
impact on the amount of health outcomes related to emergency department visits and
hospitalizations. Between 2013 and 2015, there was a 70% increase in hospitalizations
with marijuana related codes, and an increase in ED visits by 19% from 2013 to 2014.
The number of ED visits then decreased by 27% to a number lower than in 2013.
(RMPHAC, 2017)
Poison center calls also experienced dramatic increases post legalization.
Numbers from 2000-2009 were relatively stable, however after commercialization of
medical marijuana there was a two-fold increase, followed by another significant increase
in 2014. The number of calls has been relatively stable since 2014. These calls accounted
for unintentional and intentional marijuana exposures. Children age 0-8 years exhibited
the highest increase in unintentional exposures, while adults 25 and over had the highest
increase in intentional marijuana exposure calls. (RMPHAC, 2017)
Edibles were found to be a much larger problem than anticipated when marijuana
was first legalized recreationally. Strict regulations on edibles were not originally
implemented. The edibles were often similar in appearance and taste to their equivalent
food product which led to the significant number of unintentional exposures, specifically
in the pediatric population. (Wang, 2016)
An article in JAMA evaluated pediatric admissions at Children’s Hospital
Colorado, Aurora, and regional poison center (RPC) found a higher number of calls for
marijuana exposures in children 0-9 between 2009 and 2015. The results found a higher
number of RPC cases and hospital visits in the two years prior to legalization and the two
54
years after. The rate of RPC cases significantly increased at 34% per year in Colorado
compared to the U.S. at 19% per year. Around half the pediatric patients seen in the two
years after legalization were recreational marijuana exposures which indicated a clear
impact of legalization on the incidence of exposures. (Wang, et al., 2016)
Four high profile deaths that occurred after legalization were related to consuming
edibles. This prompted significant policy changes in Colorado, particularly in edible
safety regulations. Policy efforts implemented included limitations on maximum THC
levels per package, stricter packaging, clearly marked serving sizes, universal symbols,
and restrictions on packaging that may be appealing to children. (Ghosh, et al., 2017)
Other unexpected health concerns were increased prevalence of burns and cyclic
vomiting syndrome.
Edited by 1602Mark on Tuesday 13th August 18:46
1602Mark said:
Davos123 said:
Legalisation doesn't cause extra pressure on the NHS
I think I read it did in Canada? (Healthcare not NHS)Davos123 said:
1602Mark said:
Davos123 said:
Legalisation doesn't cause extra pressure on the NHS
I think I read it did in Canada? (Healthcare not NHS)1602Mark said:
There is no reason not to think it will not mimic trends set in other places (in the US) where it has been legalised though surely? Even your own experts cite Colorado as being the closest comparison.
It's not quite the same though, for example edibles are not available currently through the OCS - something which is highlighted as a cause of a spike in admissions in that report.Also, the legal channels are more heavily regulated than in the US. It is a provincially run system.
amusingduck said:
Holy st! I thought an ounce was a lot, and this guy is walking around with 8 in his bag
He must have been chuffed with that result!
Things were different in those days. t! I thought an ounce was a lot, and this guy is walking around with 8 in his bag He must have been chuffed with that result!
I was just a PC. I took orders.
I'm not sure why such leniency was shown, but the sergeant and inspector chatted about it before the chap came in. I was told what questions to ask, how to complete the paperwork, and to give it to the sergeant to pass to the inspector for his decision. Fleet Street was on Snow Hill's ground and there was a lot of quid, pro, quo shown. Info flowed both ways. Snowdon had nothing on the info that was given to Fleet Street. It was felt opportune to keep the journos onside. The chap was well known.
A particular enquiry had been running for a few days and the SIO called everyone in the incident room into the briefing room and 'told off' the detectives, hangers on and even the drudges (like me), saying the leaks had to stop. He threatened that heads would roll. I had work to complete so left the nick about half an hour or so later and walked along the Street. There was an Evening Standard placard which said, 'Robbery squad told not to speak with press'.
Hilarious in some ways. The SIO should have known better than to threaten. The best way to ensure compliance was to knock off some heads.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff