šŸŒæ ā“ Legalise it?

https://www.instagram.com/herbkitchen/

2 Likes

See cannabis is bad for you - its side effects force you to engage in an unhealthy diet leading to greater chances of obesity and diabetes. I wouldnā€™t be surprised if all the lobbying to legalise it was being funded by Dominos

6 Likes

Nick Clegg has accused the home secretary, Theresa May, of attempting to delete sentences from a Whitehall report after it concluded that there was no link between tough laws and the levels of illegal drug use.

The former deputy prime minister also said senior Conservatives, such as David Cameron and George Osborne, have failed to act on drug reform because they saw the issue as a ā€œnaughty recreational secretā€ at Notting Hill dinner parties instead of a public health crisis.

In an interview with the Guardian before a major UN conference on the global drug problem, Clegg said the Conservative government was failing to listen to warnings that the war on drugs had failed.

I like it when threads I missed before suddenly pop back up again. If some of your points totals have risen unexplained, itā€™s cos I was reading back through in here.

Originally posted by @prickly

I think that your personality more than ā€œgatewayā€ products is what will lead to drug and alcohol use and abuse.

I very much agree with this. At least as far as that someone with an addictive personality is going to be much more likely, to succumb to cannabis addiction as a result (assuming they try it of course).

Iā€™ve seen both sides, as someone who enjoys the odd puff or two when Iā€™m not working the next morning, I appreciate the magical herb for its immediate relaxing and mellowing qualities. Yet having seen a close family member succumb to a heavy cannabis addiction that did indeed have serious mental health implications as a result ā€“ I also understand the view that the plant can be dangerous to some who are already disposed to mental health issues, which can be aggravated by excessive use of strong cannabis.

The key here for me, as in so many areas of life ā€“ is in moderation, and taking personal responsibility for your actions, and consumption rates. I love the stuff myself, and swear by its medicinal qualities ā€“ but I donā€™t abuse the substance. And therein lies the secret. Likely pretty much any substance, if overused and abused, is going to lead you into difficulties. So if you know youā€™re inclined to over indulgence and addiction ā€“ then probably best to leave it well alone.

But if youā€™re perfectly capable of being a responsible human being, and taking care of yourself, knowing your limits etc. I see no reason you canā€™t enjoy a nice chillaxing smoke a couple of nights a week.

As to whether or not it should be legalised ā€“ I voted ā€œyesā€ mainly as I donā€™t like government legislation being so invasive as to poke its dirty little snout into our private lives. What is done in the privacy of oneā€™s own home, as long as youā€™re not murdering and raping people etc. should be no-ones business but our own.

But more than anything, with the massive tax windfall that could be raised with its legalisation ā€“ I think the government is missing out on a potentially huge source of income for the country, which seems somewhat insane to me. Certainly it seems to indicate some confused thinking on their part, at least. Almost like theyā€™ve been smoking too much weed, and canā€™t follow a train of thought for more than a few seconds :lou_wink_2:.

Thatā€™s what it is. They want to keep their stash all to themselves, for those sneaky behind closed doors ā€œSessionsā€ of Parliament. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

For me, Iā€™d be happy with decriminalisation. I donā€™t think an otherwise good and law-abiding citizen should be tarnished with a criminal record, for enjoying the odd toke on a phat spliff, whilst chillinā€™ out listening to mellow electronica in their car at night by the beach (as happened to one of my neighbours). But even with that, Iā€™d still think the government are missing out on a massive opportunity, by not taxing its sale.

1 Like

Uhmā€¦ not read all comments, but here is MHO; The question to me is all about health. The issues of drug barrons and criminality, I know fuck all about so cant comment, but there needs to be some clarity on causational v correlations.

It is correct that there is very limited evidence to suggest a direct causational link between the smoking of stronger variants and mental health problems. However, within the clinical environment, there is correctly an emphasis on prevention, and not just ā€˜cureā€™. As a result, medical advice would be to avoid doing things to your head that could potentially act as a trigger where the individual is predisposed to potential mental health problemsā€¦ a lack of causational evidence, does not mean no causational link.

Tragically, many mental health problems manifest thelselves in late adoloescence or early adulthood. Particularly in young men. This is a group that is also most commonly attracted to smoking, drinking, drugs etcā€¦ there are good medical hypotheses that suggest these activities can trigger mental health issues, even if they are not the direct _cause. _As with smoking, do we need to wait until there IS evidence before something is outlawed?

The long term effects are also not that well understood, but the sterotypical slowed speech and dazed perspective of the 20year + weed smoker are not considered without foundation. Imapct of habitual long term use?

No one likes a nanny state. But if said state has the repsonsibility for your care both financilaly and resource wise should you become mentally ill, then itā€™s not unreasonable for state to suggest certain things to try and help prevent this.

I would find it pretty shocking if any government was prepared to put tax revenue ahead of healthā€¦ ohā€¦ wait a minuteā€¦ we can still buy fags. booze etc all of which cause health problemsā€¦ liberty to fuck your own body up versus the public funding to deal with the consequences - delicate issue, but common sense suggests that a Government does have a responsibilty to manage healthcare resources and as such is within its rights to preach caution or ban harmful substances. We have no problem with bans on Lead in in fuel or in water pipes, or carcinogens in foodstuffs or working environmentsā€¦ so how is this different from a ban on drugs? Itā€™s not, but as soon as you make fags and alcohol legal, there is no credibilty in banning drugs or anything else that we chose to harm ourselves withā€¦ and that is the dilemma.

1 Like

Report from 420 in Hyde Park yesterday.

The scientific case is strong, the economic case is stronger.

Not that either of those will ever matter to our evidence-phobic government.

Pā€™raps not, eh?

6 Likes

A former Conservative justice minister has revealed that he was discouraged from asking difficult questions about drugs policy ā€“ for fear that looking at evidence could ā€œunpickā€ the status quo.

Crispin Blunt, who was in charge of prisons and probations at the Ministry of Justice from 2010 until 2012, said he was told during ministerial discussions that it would politically unwise to ask how much the prohibition of drugs was costing the UK prison system.

ā€œIt always had occurred to me that drugs misuse was obviously a major driver of demand in the criminal justice system,ā€ he told a fringe event at the Conservative annual conference in Birmingham.

Originally posted by @pap

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/crispin-blunt-drugs-legalisation-difficult-questions-former-justice-poppers-a7343511.html

FOI

Listened to this episode of Distraction Pieces recently, I found it really interesting. The guest is Neil Woods, who was formerly an undercover Police Officer, working mostly on drug cases. He discusses how, in his opinion, the ā€˜War on Drugsā€™ is not only futile, but serves to solidify gangster monopolies, and increase violence.

Itā€™s about 18 months old, but I donā€™t think that really matters too much.

Neil Woods - Distraction Pieces

2 Likes

A big claim. Thatā€™s a lot of blame to place on a single band.

1 Like

About, bloody, time.

1 Like

It really is daft

We havenā€™t been able to get hold of medical cannabis when opiated drugs are widely available

At least govt have done something right for once

3 Likes

With medicinal cannabis do you have to smoke it? If so surely thatā€™s going to lead to other health problems.

A kind of distant relative of mine has a rather severely epileptic son. Someone recommended cannabis oil to them to help with his (frequent) violent seizures. They gave them some to try and the results were pretty remarkable.

They only found out it was illegal and not able to be prescribed once they went to their doctor to get more.

They ended up moving to the US, partly, because of the availability of similar products (his dad did also get a decent job offer out there). How mad is it that we are behind the USA on an issue like this?

Itā€™s believed that there are lots of medical benefits that could be gained from various psychoactive drugs. However, due to our pretty draconian drug laws, scientists and researchers are blocked from carrying out tests on them. Madness.

3 Likes

Nah, thereā€™s loads of ways that the THC/CBD can be synthesised and administered.

Creams, oils, tablets etc.

3 Likes

My 16 year old son asked me to stop smoking dope a couple of weeks ago, just after I came out of hospital with alcohol related liver, pancreas and gall bladder issues (theyā€™re all fucked, the gall bladder came out).

I am very proud of him for doing this, as most of his mates see smoking weed as a future lifestyle choice. He realises that is not his pathway, though I hoped I could cope with alcohol addiction by replacing it with weed.

The weed he and I used to smoke /bong was very home grown and tame, compared to high thc stuff.

It is strange, the people in positions to make decisions about the legality of cannabis have probably moved on from experiencing the highs and lows of it and encountering people who benefit or fail on it.

I think the question shouldnā€™t be ā€˜legalise this or that drugā€™, rather legalise all, or make all illegal. What is fun? Drugs or health?

5 Likes

I certainly think Cannabis for medicinal reasons is hard to reason against. It doesnā€™t get you high, not addictive (apart from itā€™s medicinal efficacy) but its use is now recognised as being therapeutically useful for a number of conditions.
Iā€™ve never smoked so wasnā€™t tempted even though I was surrounded by itā€¦cigarettes simply made me sickā€¦Iā€™m sure ditto for Cannabis. Iā€™m not in favour of a blanket deregulationā€¦I have a niece with mental health problems due to heavy use of ā€œSkunkā€ā€¦her 3 boys are now living with relatives and sheā€™s alienated from the rest of the family.
My wife has had MS for over 30 years, during that time sheā€™s been offered very little, no I lieā€¦sheā€™s been offered nothing. She doesnā€™t get muscle spasms but apparently a lot of MS sufferers do and Cannabis illegally obtained is the only way they can relieve their symptoms. MS has a multiplicity of symptoms most of which have no recognised treatmentsā€¦itā€™s shameful one of the treatments available to them can only be accessed by breaking the law.

4 Likes

There was an excellent piece on PM (Radio 4 programme) a week or so back regarding the decriminalisation of drugs in Portugal. Al drugs there, not just cannabis, are now not legal, but possession of them isnā€™t a criminal offence - unless someone is found to be in possession of more than would be required for their own needs, in which case they will be charged with dealing.

Essentially, the whole area of drug use is now treated as a health issue and not a legal/criminal one. Drug users are offered treatment and not prosecution. The results have been startling; drug use and associated crime have been massively reduced. The police, who were highly sceptical at first, now wholly embrace the policy, not least as they now have far more resources to devote to tackling real crime (including, of course, the trade in illegal drugs).

A couple of links - the thing I listened to isnā€™t available, though as it formed part of a news programme thatā€™s hardly surprising):

Meanwhile, our own government is more interested in pursuing an unwinnable ā€œwar on drugsā€, apparently based more on ludicrous notions of sin and morality than on practicality and effectiveness.

5 Likes