Cannabis

FTA69

What would people's opinions be on the subject of legalisation?

Personally I would be in favour of complete legalisation (preferably on an EU wide basis) as opposed to decriminalisation. The reasons being the latter still prevents the legal cultivation and/or supply and therefore still leaves the trade open to control from criminals.

I would propose legalisation for the following reasons:

1) The fact it remains illegal enables gangs to make large profits from its sale and supply.
2) It is a relatively minor psychoactive and its occasional use has less long and short term side-effects than alcohol. I believe it is a freedom of choice issue.
3) It has been used around the world since civilisation began, it predates alcohol and remains a popular substance amongst hundreds of millions of people around the world. Prohibition has not removed its use from society, instead it has simply driven it underground.
4) Legalisation would enable the government to regulate quality as well as tax the substance. They could also restrict supply to those over 18 through selected establishments eg Amsterdam.

RalphCifaretto

I'm in full agreement there.

Time Magazine

Aw jaysus here we go again.

I'm not getting into it. Done to death before.

CiaranC

Out of interest, are any of the parties in the upcoming election advocating any level of relaxation of prohibition?

DarkJager

In full agreement with you. Cannabis has been proven to be less dangerous than alcohol, yet it is still classed as an illegal substance. Yes, a minority of the people who smoke it may get mental side effects after heavy usage, but paranoia is a lot better than destroying your liver. The problem is that the Government know what good it would do to legalise this, but is afraid to do so because of people who have it ingrained in their narrow minds that this drug is bad.

Compare crime stats for Amsterdam to Dublin just to see a case in point of how safe this "illegal" drug is compared to the "legal" drug alcohol.

Akrasia

Cannabis is natures way of telling people to slow down.

All this rushing about is bad for us.

Relax, pull up a bean bag, I'll spark a spliff, and we'll listen to the excellent guitars on The Sultans of Swing and re-discover the lost meaning behind music.

We work too hard, at a job it takes half the day to get to, and then when we go out on our day off to unwind or just be with our friends, we're forced to spend our time and our money in some overcrowded, smelly, boiling hot, barn of a 'super-pub' that blasts out music too loud for conversation because research shows people drink more when they're not able to talk to each other.

FTA69

. Yes, a minority of the people who smoke it may get mental side effects after heavy usage,

This is the latest argument advanced by those who wish to keep cannabis illegal, however despite being almost universally accepted by the media (the examiner had a ridiculous article saying it causes heart failure) it is not wholly substantiated and nor can it be considered fact. Of course prolonged use of cannabis would exacerbate an existing mental condition, but so would any psychoactive, as well as certain medications. Why the substance should be made illegal because of those who shouldn't be taking ANY drugs whatsoever bemuses me. And besides, anybody can purchase cannabis with ease, whether it is illegal or not.

layke

Well growing up in Dublin, going to parties and what not i've come across the odd smoker in my time. Still waiting to meet all these psycho's the scientests say cannabis creates.

That said the only way it should be made legal is for those who need it medically. I think were actually better off without it as is.

DarkJager

No I don't agree it should be legalised exclusively for medical use. Its a recreational drug, used for the same purposes as alcohol - to relax. If it is legalised, then it should be available to the public for purchase as well. Otherwise, there will still be an illegal market for it.

o1s1n

layke wrote:

I think were actually better off without it as is.

??????????
Look around, it's everywhere. We are most definitely not "without it".

RalphCifaretto

I think were actually better off without it as is.

We're not without it though. I remember seeing the figures a while back and I was genuinely shocked. A staggering number of Irish people use cannabis on a regular basis. Calling it illegal and brushing it under the carpet is completely pointless.

As long as it remains illegal, huge numbers of Irish people are being exposed to the health risks associated with unregulated hash.

dulpit

DarkJager wrote:

Yes, a minority of the people who smoke it may get mental side effects after heavy usage, but paranoia is a lot better than destroying your liver.

So you mean to tell me that you have a choice of smoking an illegal narcotic or drinking to excess? That's the only choice we have? No offence buddy but i find that comment stoopid and ridiculous...

o1s1n

dulpit wrote:

So you mean to tell me that you have a choice of smoking an illegal narcotic or drinking to excess? That's the only choice we have? No offence buddy but i find that comment stoopid and ridiculous...

Cannabis is not a narcotic. No one is saying you have to smoke it to excess either.

JC 2K3

dulpit wrote:

So you mean to tell me that you have a choice of smoking an illegal narcotic or drinking to excess? That's the only choice we have? No offence buddy but i find that comment stoopid and ridiculous...

Cannabis isn't a narcotic.

I find that comment stupid and ridiculous.

DarkJager

My point being if cannabis is consumed to excess, it is nowhere near as dangerous or harmful as drinking alcohol to excess. I'm not just offering 2 extremes and I am by no means promoting excess of either substance.

DarkJager

In U.S.legal context, narcotic refers to opium, opium derivatives, and their semi-synthetic or fully synthetic substitutes "as well as cocaine and coca leaves," which although classified as "narcotics" in the U.S. Controlled Substances Act (CSA), are chemically not narcotics. Contrary to popular belief, marijuana is not a narcotic.

Fact.

o1s1n

DarkJager wrote:

Get your facts straight.

You misunderstood his post. He found the comment dulpit made ridiculous. He was agreeing that it's not a narcotic.

DarkJager

Apologies JC 2K3, I misread your post.

JC 2K3

No problem

bonkey

FTA69 wrote:

Personally I would be in favour of complete legalisation (preferably on an EU wide basis) as opposed to decriminalisation.

AS far as I know, the most accurate tests for "driving under the influence" will register a positive for up to 24 hours.

Would you be willing to accept that as a cost of legalisation - that if you smoked some evening during the week, you could lose your license for testing positive whilst driving home after work, the following day, 18 or more hours later.

If not, then how do you propose that you balance legalisation with such issues as "stoned driving"???

DarkJager

The effects of cannabis last for up to 4 hours. Legislation would need to take into account that after a period of time, you are no longer "under the influence" so to speak.

JC 2K3

bonkey wrote:

AS far as I know, the most accurate tests for "driving under the influence" will register a positive for up to 24 hours.

Would you be willing to accept that as a cost of legalisation - that if you smoked some evening during the week, you could lose your license for testing positive whilst driving home after work, the following day, 18 or more hours later.

If not, then how do you propose that you balance legalisation with such issues as "stoned driving"???

I hear this argument often and never understand it. Legalisation with severe driving restrictions is better than it being illegal, I'd accept a law that punished those with any trace of THC in their system while driving severely.

Sure it might reduce the amount of cars on the road

jonny72

As it is, cannabis is fairly easy to get, its incredibly cheap, its fun to 'get' or to 'have' because its illegal.

Out of about 2 dozen people I know who have smoked it for the past 5 to 10 years about half have 'problems' directly related to it. Ranging from panic attacks, change in personality, addiction, recluseness, social problems. Nothing massively serious but enough to affect that persons life.

o1s1n

jonny72 wrote:

As it is, cannabis is fairly easy to get, its incredibly cheap, its fun to 'get' or to 'have' because its illegal.

Out of about 2 dozen people I know who have smoked it for the past 5 to 10 years about half have 'problems' directly related to it. Ranging from panic attacks, change in personality, addiction, recluseness, social problems. Nothing massively serious but enough to affect that persons life.

And I know drinkers who have the exact same problems. It all comes down to the abuse of a substance. Doesn't matter what that substance is.

However, in the case of alcohol abuse vs Cannabis abuse, the former is going to mess your body and mind up a hell of a lot more than the latter. Not to mention the potential to lead to death.

Time Magazine

o1s1n wrote:

And I know drinkers who have the exact same problems. It all comes down to the abuse of a substance. Doesn't matter what that substance is.

So you agree that the legalisation of alcohol is not working well and is, in fact, a serious problem?

I'm sure you could work out the rest of my argument from here, it's exam-time and I'm too busy to re-hash what I've already posted.

Goodshape

Ibid wrote:

So you agree that the legalisation of alcohol is not working well and is, in fact, a serious problem?

I'm sure you could work out the rest of my argument from here, it's exam-time and I'm too busy to re-hash what I've already posted.

The choice to use/abuse alcohol or not is in the hands of the consumer, where it should be. Many people are capable of enjoying a drink without suffering any negative effects. Regardless, alchohol can lead to many personal and social problems. Luckily the [relative] few that suffer from alcohol related issues have a wide range of help available to them. It's unfortunate that these problems exist at all, but such is life. In the interest of freedom, and fairness, we are allowed the choice.

The same is not true for cannabis, and therein lies the hypocrisy. The [relative] few who have problems relating to cannabis abuse have much less in the way of help or support. Them and the rest of us are branded as criminals instead. Why so?

Why can I choose one, but not the other? What secret am I missing here?

lostexpectation

Goodshape wrote:

The same is not true for cannabis, and therein lies the hypocrisy. The [relative] few who have problems relating to cannabis abuse have much less in the way of help or support. Them and the rest of us are branded as criminals instead. Why so?

Why can I choose one, but not the other? What secret am I missing here?

is it illegal to grow hemp here?

bonkey

JC 2K3 wrote:

I hear this argument often and never understand it.

What argument? I was asking a question.

The reason I asked it is because of the post immediately before yours, where DarkJager wants the law to somehow take into account factors that - as I pointed out - cannot currently be tested for.

I believe there is a case to be made for legalisation, but it is up to the people making that case to provide a full and proper framework. Saying "they should find a way..." isn't acceptable. Either propose the way it can be tested, or accept the 24-hour test as the best thats currently available.

You went for option 2. DarkJager went for neither. If I was trying to make a point, DJ has made it for me.

Goodshape

lostexpectation wrote:

is it illegal to grow hemp here?

Um, yes, I believe it is.

It may be possible to grow some for certain uses with a licence, I'm honestly not sure. Why do you ask?

I've been living in the Netherlands for last 5 months. I must say I find the approach here is generally far more sensible and realistic than the situation in Ireland.

stewie01

I dont think it will be legalised in the near future by the simple fact of the relationship between the government and the Irish drinks lobby.
Imagine the losses they would accumilate in there industry if instead of the majority of ppl goin out at the weekend spending €80-90 a night on alcohol, went and just spent €10-15 on a 2-4 'trip'.

and we cant go messin with the drink companies profits now can we?