Should cannibas be legalised????

pocketac3s

I'm all for it. Free choice all the way. If implemented properly, the benefits far outweigh the consequences. Just because something is legal, doesn't mean you have to do it. Not only will it cut out the criminal element but the massive tax boost could be put into educating younger people about the drug and changing attitude to substances (alcohol included) that Irish people have.

Do kids these days get drug education? I'm only 21 but I can't remember been told about drugs in either primary or secondary school - apart from the whole "drugs are bad, don't do drugs, because drugs are bad". The fact of the matter is, the drug policy at the moment just doesn't work - there has allways been drugs in society, and there allways will be drugs in society - Some people need to realise that throwing millions of squids at this problem will never eliminate it - we're much better off managing it.

argh - rant over.

boss^is^dead

haha I dont think legalizing smoke would be the best idea this government ever came out with. we'd have a nation of 20y/o paranoid delinquents in a few years.it's just not right no matter what way you look at it.It's not socially friendly in its own way,even though its painted up to be "cool". I mean Im a 21 year old musician/3d animator/metal enthusiast and I've had my fair share of all things legal and illegal over the years,but allowing people to get stoned 24/7 would be an absolute disaster. The irish have already displayed their inability to control drink and the problems it creates.Allowing another drug into the micture is not the answer.

democrates

If I were a drug pusher and one of my main sources of income dissappeared due to legalisation of cannabis, I'd be forced to put more effort into pushing harder drugs to younger customers in order to make a living.

ScumLord

ScienceNerd wrote:

I tried marjuana once

Killed 7 people

Jesus Christ!! Maybe we should rethink this thing. I mean 7 people! I only killed 2... and a horse, but that doesn't really count does it?

pocketac3s

democrates wrote: »

If I were a drug pusher and one of my main sources of income dissappeared due to legalisation of cannabis, I'd be forced to put more effort into pushing harder drugs to younger customers in order to make a living.

Well maybe we should legalise all drugs? People take them anyway - they always have and always will. I'm not saying give drug dealers carte blanche - I'm talking about creating the heaviest regulated industry in the country. Sold only through Government outlets, only to people over 18, only to people that were educated in the effects these substances can have, and a trillion other rules if needs be.

I've a friend (or had a friend, he's not the same anymore) who developed schizophrenia through what I believe was a combination of drugs and unrelated family matters. I guarantee you that his drug dealer didn't offer him counselling when he began to develop his early symptoms. I guarantee you he didn't fully comprehend the interactions the chemicals he took could have on his brain. And I can also guarantee that his drug dealer didn't ask him for ID when he was looking for something. The result of the way things are at the moment is that my friend is effectively a wasted life (that's a horrible thing to say, but he has nothing anymore)

Obviously these debates will go around in circles, because the two sides are dug deep in their camps - and it's nigh impossible to change someones beliefs. My opinion on this subject is radical to some people, and I understand some people might even be sickened by what I'm saying - and I'm almost certain that some reform this big won't happen in our lifetimes - but its good to talk :rolleyes:

So I wonder, given that the anti-drug side has never won a battle in "the war on drugs" (struck some blows yes, but never a battle) and that the current approach obviously doesn't work - what do people see as a viable solution to the problem?

pclancy

Im totally for legalising...but it wont happen.

I dont think Ireland is ready to legalise as 80% of its people dont know what it really is, its effects or links to other drugs. In theory if it was done like Holland it would work fine here but I wonder then are we responsible enough! Look how high our drink and drug intake levels are allready compared to the rest of the world...

One thing i do believe now is people should be made aware of how dangerous it is to drive after a few smokes. IMO its as bad as driving when drunk, not in the same reckless streak drink drivers get but its just as dangerous reactionwise and should be clamped down on. I treat smoking hash the same as I do drinking, I dont drive after indulgeng.

ScumLord

I don't know i think Ireland could be close to the brink. We're a fairly well informed bunch, at the very least we like to keep up with the current news it's been mentioned enough in the media to get peoples interests peaked and the amount of threads that keep popping up here (and going onto many, many pages) show that it is a topic that comes up on a regular basis. With so many hidden smokers around the country the good news is spreading.

we're a small, fairly liberal, in a way country. If anyone's mad enough to try it, it's us.

democrates

pocketac3s wrote: »

Well maybe we should legalise all drugs? People take them anyway - they always have and always will. I'm not saying give drug dealers carte blanche - I'm talking about creating the heaviest regulated industry in the country. Sold only through Government outlets, only to people over 18, only to people that were educated in the effects these substances can have, and a trillion other rules if needs be.

I've a friend (or had a friend, he's not the same anymore) who developed schizophrenia through what I believe was a combination of drugs and unrelated family matters. I guarantee you that his drug dealer didn't offer him counselling when he began to develop his early symptoms. I guarantee you he didn't fully comprehend the interactions the chemicals he took could have on his brain. And I can also guarantee that his drug dealer didn't ask him for ID when he was looking for something. The result of the way things are at the moment is that my friend is effectively a wasted life (that's a horrible thing to say, but he has nothing anymore)

Obviously these debates will go around in circles, because the two sides are dug deep in their camps - and it's nigh impossible to change someones beliefs. My opinion on this subject is radical to some people, and I understand some people might even be sickened by what I'm saying - and I'm almost certain that some reform this big won't happen in our lifetimes - but its good to talk :rolleyes:

So I wonder, given that the anti-drug side has never won a battle in "the war on drugs" (struck some blows yes, but never a battle) and that the current approach obviously doesn't work - what do people see as a viable solution to the problem?

Grand, well let the fallen sue the state for supplying them with sh1t that hurt them. meanwhile, I the poor auld pusher have to push meth and crack-cocaine to 8 year olds to keep myself in heroin.

JC 2K3

ryanairzer wrote: »

We should totally legalise heroin and see what happens.

Not much I reckon, apart from current junkies having a better quality of life and money being taken out of criminals' hands. There's far too much of a stigma against heroin for simply legalising it to make much difference in terms of usage.

boss^is^dead wrote: »

allowing people to get stoned 24/7 would be an absolute disaster.

But they wouldn't be stoned 24/7.....

Anyway, I've decided that don't support the exclusive legalisation of cannabis. IMO it's not any more "soft" than any other drug. All or nothing tbh.

pocketac3s

democrates wrote: »

Grand, well let the fallen sue the state for supplying them with sh1t that hurt them. meanwhile, I the poor auld pusher have to push meth and crack-cocaine to 8 year olds to keep myself in heroin.

So I wonder, given that the anti-drug side has never won a battle in "the war on drugs" (struck some blows yes, but never a battle) and that the current approach obviously doesn't work - what do people see as a viable solution to the problem?

cson

"If alcohol or tobacco were discovered tomorrow they would be illegal" < That was in my LC Chemistry book :eek:. Anyway on topic, I don't think it would happen, the general publics perception of drugs has negative conotations and a vote would be a landslide victory for the anti drugs crew. Incidentally I detest the ganja myself but I don't mind others using it (That aren't my family or close friends)

psilocybe

So why restrict it? We are adults, aren't we?
The Misuse of Drugs act at the moment is a ****ing joke. Do you know the act is identical to the UK MoD Act?

psilocybe

nvm

democrates

pocketac3s wrote: »

So I wonder, given that the anti-drug side has never won a battle in "the war on drugs" (struck some blows yes, but never a battle) and that the current approach obviously doesn't work - what do people see as a viable solution to the problem?

I didn't step up to be an omnipotent instant solution provider, just pointing out the danger of setting up a legalisation v drug technology race.

ScumLord

cson wrote: »

"If alcohol or tobacco were discovered tomorrow they would be illegal" < That was in my LC Chemistry book :eek:. Anyway on topic, I don't think it would happen, the general publics perception of drugs has negative conotations and a vote would be a landslide victory for the anti drugs crew. Incidentally I detest the ganja myself but I don't mind others using it (That aren't my family or close friends)

As a middle ground man where would you stand in the vote, yes or no? For legalization.

SimpleSam06

If your happiness depends on the amount of a burned herb that you can inhale, and it does so to the extent that you are willing to risk prison for it, you have a problem. Not to mention that that's probably one of the saddest things I've ever heard.

pocketac3s

democrates wrote: »

I didn't step up to be an omnipotent instant solution provider, just pointing out the danger of setting up a legalisation v drug technology race.

I understand that, sure if you where in government you'd be able to pay a few doctors to come up with a solution for you - and blame them if it didn't work out! The problems will be there either way, legal or not, I just think its logical to have a certain degree of control over them through legalisation.

Sam Vimes

democrates wrote: »

Grand, well let the fallen sue the state for supplying them with sh1t that hurt them. meanwhile, I the poor auld pusher have to push meth and crack-cocaine to 8 year olds to keep myself in heroin.

people don't sue the state because they got lung cancer or liver disease. Why would they sue if they were harmed by cannabis?

all they'd have to do is put a warning on the pack.

and you don't think that dealers are pushing them on 8 year olds already? I'm for legalising everything. Why would someone buy something off a filthy scumbag on the street if they could go to a shop and buy it at government subsidised prices? Or even free for addicts. Programs worldwide have shown that supplying heroin to addicts in controlled doses can allow them to become productive members of society

Dakeyras

i haven't read any of the preceding bollox but the answer is

yes

if i have to explain why to you then you aren't worth explaining it to, no really

Tha Gopher

ScumLord wrote: »

Where's the poll?


I think the people that are rigidly stuck to the opinion that cannabis shouldn't be legalised just, just because, are in the minority at this stage. When you explain out the benefits of legalisation and get people out of the misconception that cannabis is a killer drug that turns everyone into crazed drug addicts.

This is still what allot of people thing about weed.
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=UFTck49skCk

The video is somewhat cheesy but half true. There are a great many people who would get violent if their supply of hash was interrupted. Its no coincidence that there was an upsurge of violence in Mountjoy (at least one murder, maybe two) in summer 2006 in the height of the hash drought.

cson

ScumLord wrote: »

As a middle ground man where would you stand in the vote, yes or no? For legalization.

I'd have a semi liberal attitude towards it; I'd say legalise it with restrictions and heavily licence the vendors, i.e. You can only smoke it in private and only purchase a certain quantity in chemists. At the end of the day we're all adults and we're big enough to make our own choices. The vendor thing is a huge issue with me as regarding Kids getting their hands on it, I'd rather they were shielded from it until they're old enough to decide for themselves.

Robbo

humanji wrote: »

hmmm, I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm assuming this thread is going to go round in circles with endless points being made and ignored (in particular the old favourite "But alchohol and tobacco are legal" whine) . Then loads of links of reports for and against the idea until finally people just get bored and move on to a thread about masturbation.

But maybe, just maybe, this'll be the thread to prove me wrong and break the mould.

You missed the bit where someone whacks in a chunk of a Bill Hicks transcript like it were a pronunciation from Zarathustra himself...

sebastianlieken

it would bring down alot of street crime if it were legalised id say

Dakeyras

Tha Gopher wrote: »

The video is somewhat cheesy but half true. There are a great many people who would get violent if their supply of hash was interrupted. Its no coincidence that there was an upsurge of violence in Mountjoy (at least one murder, maybe two) in summer 2006 in the height of the hash drought.

you make me laugh, which is nice. though probably not for you

Endurance Man

I wonder how many people who voted no, smoke tobacco or drink? Probably a high %. Weed is no more harmful than both those substances and yet because they are not branded "drugs" by our governments they are legal.

Sam Vimes

Tha Gopher wrote: »

The video is somewhat cheesy but half true. There are a great many people who would get violent if their supply of hash was interrupted. Its no coincidence that there was an upsurge of violence in Mountjoy (at least one murder, maybe two) in summer 2006 in the height of the hash drought.

so if taking away people's hash makes them violent, why were there only murders in a prison where the people are already violent? why weren't there killings in the streets?

and do you have a study to show that the apparent upsurge in violence was directly caused by a lack of hash or did you just notice a coincidence that fitted with your preconceived view?

Dakeyras

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

If your happiness depends on the amount of a burned herb that you can inhale, and it does so to the extent that you are willing to risk prison for it, you have a problem. Not to mention that that's probably one of the saddest things I've ever heard.

lol, housing bubble wolverine i see. you still amuse me. one of the saddest things i've ever heard is that a certain plant is defined as evil while another is deemed okay, while certain plants and derivatives are deemed okay, others are deemed illegal. you still bring a smile to my face which is nice and a sadness to my heart but then we all can't agree

Terry

Dakeyras wrote: »

lol, housing bubble wolverine i see. you still amuse me. one of the saddest things i've ever heard is that a certain plant is defined as evil while another is deemed okay, while certain plants and derivatives are deemed okay, others are deemed illegal. you still bring a smile to my face which is nice and a sadness to my heart but then we all can't agree

Not again.

Oh well, here goes.

Put down your joints and think about it for a minute.
Do you really think that legalisation of cannabis will make any difference to its consumption and the problems that come with that?
Do you honestly believe that making it available to those over 21 will stop kids from getting their hands on it?
Do you honestly believe it will be cheaper if legalised?

If you answer yes to any of those questions, then you are either stoned or really deluded.

JC 2K3

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

If your happiness depends on the amount of a burned herb that you can inhale, and it does so to the extent that you are willing to risk prison for it, you have a problem. Not to mention that that's probably one of the saddest things I've ever heard.

I think it's sad for anyone's happiness to depend solely on any one thing. However, I don't think it's any more sad for someone to enjoy drug use than it is for someone to enjoy playing a sport or watching a movie. Drugs just have an illogical stigma associated with them.

JC 2K3

Terry wrote: »

Do you honestly believe that making it available to those over 21 will stop kids from getting their hands on it?

Actually, I've been thinking about this recently and I've concluded that the government really have to tackle the problem of underage drinking successfully by regulating alcohol more effectively before they even think about legalising any other drug.

One of the key arguments made by people pro-legalisation is that strict regulation would be necessary, yet I've never seen any document put forward by any pro-legalisation group with an outline of exactly how this would be done. It would make a lot of sense to try and regulate the recreational drugs that are still legal properly before legalising more.