Originally posted by @Kingdom-Come
Just because alcohol is worse, it is no justification to legalise something that we know is harmful. Anyway you generally have to smoke tobacco to use weed, so the drug itself might be less harmful, but the shit its wrapped in certainly is.
Is it harmful? Iāve not seen any legitimate research into the subject and would be interested in seeing it. Obviously, any reasearch that starts with an agenda either pro or anti wouldnāt be of any interest.
Iāve not seen any research, however every arguement for legalising it states that it is less harmful, which suggest that there is harm being done
Second, your position is that it is harmful so ban it. Iām not convinced by your premise, but bypassing that, should we then ban alcohol as it is evidentially harmful?
Iām not saying ban it, Iām saying donāt legalise it - that is a subtle difference. If something was known to be harmful why would you legalise it? We have alcohol and tobacco, which are harmful yet legal, isnt that enough shit in the market place? Should we ban both, from a pure health standpoint, probably. From a practical standpoint - probably impossible. From a personal standpoint - if you banned wine, Iād probably cry.
Third, you certainly dont have to smoke tobacco with weed. Youāre maybe thinking of resin or hash (very different to weed).
Fair enough - although Iām pretty sure inhaling smoke of any type repeatedly into your lungs cannot be good for you.
Iād love to see how much we actually spend on investigation, enforcement and incarceration. With the role of Police Commissioner becoming politicised, weed busts are great for whacking onto the front page of the local rag.
Decriminalisation would be a welcome step in the right direction, but youāre still left with an unregulated, untaxed market. Why go for the half-measure?
With respect to CBās post above, thatās pretty typical. By his own admission, no real research done, and would be unhappy if an existing (and worse) vice was banned.
Seems to me weāre paying a lot of money to placate people who lazily claim that they donāt approve, yet actually have no real stake in the issue.
Originally posted by @pap
_ Iād love to see how much we actually spend on investigation, enforcement and incarceration. With the role of Police Commissioner becoming politicised, weed busts are great for whacking onto the front page of the local rag. _
Bankers gamble other peopleās money, commit fraud and crash the economy. No punishment.
Politicians, celebrities etc rape children for years, cover each others backs. No punishment.
Kid smokes a bit of weed. Criminal.
Ridiculous.
Yeah legalise it, Iād much rather deal with someone high on cannabis than someone out of their face on drink. Drink tends to bring out aggresiveness, dope tends to put you to sleep and make you very hungry (I swear this is why 24 hour garages were more common in Uni towns when I was younger!).
However we have to be very aware of the potential risks and the fact that it *IS* and can be a gateway drug.
I knew a lot of people at Uni that were heavy cannabis users and their lives did take a turn for the worse, lethargy, general donāt care attitude, being stoned during the day etc. etc.
There has been mention of the cost of drinking to the state, accidents, fights etc but cannabis runs the same risk. How many people will drive stoned because theyāve only had 1 joint??
Can we add a āsitting firmly on the fenceā option to the vote??
My balance is way too fucked for that.
Originally posted by @BTripz
However we have to be very aware of the potential risks and the fact that it *IS* and can be a gateway drug.
This isnāt an argument Iām hugely sold on. I know people that have used things that are much worse and not touched cannabis, I know people that have smoked cannabis and never touched anything else and most things in between. You can just as easily argue that alcohol is a gateway drug, which will usually be the first thing anyone tries.
Always reminds me of this
There has been mention of the cost of drinking to the state, accidents, fights etc but cannabis runs the same risk. How many people will drive stoned because theyāve only had 1 joint??
Yeah, obviously driving stoned should not be encouraged and should be punishable in the same way to drinking. But again, itās a weak argument for banning the substance out right. How many substances can you buy/be prescribed that mean you canāt drive? To link to another point you made, Iād rather someone was driving after a joint than after drinking. Not condoning either at all, but one is certainly more dangerous than the other.
You could argue that alcohol is a gateway drug to cannabis. Many people try their first joint when they are pissed.
Originally posted by @KRG
You can just as easily argue that alcohol is a gateway drug, which will usually be the first thing anyone tries.
Originally posted by @pap
You could argue that alcohol is a gateway drug to cannabis. Many people try their first joint when they are pissed.
Alright, echo.
I did read your point, KRG - but I was looking to make the direct link between the two.
I smoked my first bifter when tanked up and hurled my guts up two hours later. Put me off weed for life.
I reckon legalise it. It canāt be any worse than being on the turps. Except for late night trips to the nearest garage to clean them out of wagon wheels and cheddars.
Biff & Booze are a bad combo.
Originally posted by @KRG
Originally posted by @Numptyboi
Originally posted by @pap
You could argue that alcohol is a gateway drug to cannabis. Many people try their first joint when they are pissed.
I smoked my first bifter when tanked up and hurled my guts up two hours later. Put me off weed for life.
Biff & Booze are a bad combo.
Depends which way round you do it.
Anytime anyone says āI tried weed, but I felt sickā I ask them if they were drunk beforehand. 99% of the time they were.
Yeah, I was. Absolutely cunted.
Takes the edge off the smack cravings.
Legalise it. Iāll make my own mind up, thanks.
I think that your personality more than āgatewayā products is what will lead to drug and alcohol use and abuse. As far as weed goes there is a lot to say for the relief it can bring to MS sufferers plus there have been very positive links between light cannabis usage and controlling fits in children. As with almost anything, overuse can give you problems, not just limited to staring into the fridge for minutes on end. Its all about balance.
I am (was) a big fan of the āhighā that you get from good quality weed but not once mixed with tobacco, it changes everything, the nicoteen rush is way too intense. I think on balance I would like to see it legalised if only to annoy the filth and remove the possibilty of looking into their smug faces when getting nicked for having a dusty old hash lump the size of a pea unknowingly hidden in the bottom of your backpack.
The boy Farron speaks sense, from this Huffington article
This week, Farron said cannabis should be legalised. The policy shift was accompanied by an admission that he had smoked the drug while at university. Did he enjoy it? āI donāt remember,ā The MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale laughs.
But he says it is his experience as an MP, not his youthful experimentation, that informs the decision.
āI donāt think my position on this issue is affected by that at all. I think itās just right to honest about it. For what itās worth, I take the view that as a liberal you should be against everything that robs you of your liberty and that includes stuff that youāre addicted to,ā he says.
He attacks the āpolitically easyā decision of many MPs to ignore evidence that, he argues, shows legalisation is the way forward. āWhen you look at the damage done by drug-related crime in so many of our communities even in a pleasant place like the Lake District, itās real and itās heart breaking. To ignore the evidence for a change in regulation that could make that better, I think thatās really reprehensible.ā
Before he became Conservative leader, Cameron famously held a more liberal position on drugs. āI think itās focus group driven rather than evidence driven. The same applies to his position on refugees,ā Farron says of the prime minister. āHe is a follower not a leader.ā
āAs an MP you see the damage drugs do to families and communities and my motivation is about that. And you see very talented people brought very, very low. Families which were otherwise stable brought to their knees by addiction.ā
Legalisation, he says, will enable the government to regulate the strength of the drug so people know what they are smoking while at the same time ācompletely kicking the legs from underneathā criminals.
āYou also take away cannabis from the same marketplace as harder drugs then you significantly reduce the chances of people moving from one to another because youāre just not in the same place when youāre buying it,ā he says.
Farron also argues it would mean people who have problems are treated as people with a health problem rather than a criminal one and therefore are more likely to come forward to seek help.
To ācap it allā, he adds, a legalised cannabis market would raise Ā£1bn in taxes which could be ploughed back into police, healthcare and education.
Fuck me, a british politician talking sense on drug policy. Thatās nearly knocked me off my chair. Fair play Tim.
Cheers for sharing BBB.