Marijuana March tomorrow.

passive

bubonicus wrote: »

What's wrong, did he spell everything correctly so you want to give him a history lesson now.

take it to the politics forum.

Uh.. Take it to the "wannabe mod" forum?

(Edit; I do support the legalisation thing. Don't get beaten up by angry Gardaí though, and try distance yourself from the scumbags who are going to come along to make trouble/get wasted. Would be there if I wasn't elsewhere.)

Overheal

DAMNIT

I have an Exam tomorrow

Wertz

gollem_1975 wrote: »

there are posters for this event around town with a marijuana leaf as it emblem so i think gardai intelligence might be aware of this event.

I also noticed a new head shop in town ( near hardwicke street ) .

there seem to be loads of these places in dublin now .

I'm suprised that there is such a demand for them.

perhaps these shops could sponsor the stroll tommorow

Perhaps you don't realise that the last thing the vultures that own head shops (what a stupid fucking name) want to see is any sort of move to legalise/decriminalise/reclassify cannabis, and deprive them of their lucrative trade in legal "highs".

As for the march itself? Pointless in the extreme...sorry to be cynical but that's the reality of it. General attitudes in this country rail against people that want to go against the grain, particularly those who are seen as stupid, sluggish, giggling, lazy, red-eyed druggies/hippies with only their own selfish interests (ie getting stoned with no consequences) at heart.
Mass non compliance with drug laws is the only way to force changes in legislation...they can't put the whole populace of drug users in jail....where would they put the real criminals?

AngryBadger

OP you'd be far better off putting together a well crafted, coherent petition, and submitting it to Pat Carey, Minister of State with special responsibility as Government Chief Whip at the Department of An Taoiseach. On the face of his approach to drugs he seems more agreeable to a reasonable case for the legalisation of marijuana.

A quick google will furnish you with his e-mail, (I'm not putting it up here because frankly I don't know the regs about that kind of thing on boards).

This would be far more productive than any demonstration, it's a means of showing the numbers of people who this issue matters to, without the inevitable influx of scumbags, and without painting a target on your forehead so the police can raid your gaff.

All you need is some kind of scientific type person to wade through the scientific literature and put together a compelling case as to why marijuana should not be illegal in this country...now where oh where would you find such a person

EDIT: I'm not sure what his current mandate is with the cabinet re-shuffle yesterday, you should probably look into that.

Peyton Manning

Excellent, now I know the best spot to deal.

Nick_oliveri

Wertz wrote: »

Perhaps you don't realise that the last thing the vultures that own head shops (what a stupid fucking name) want to see is any sort of move to legalise/decriminalise/reclassify cannabis, and deprive them of their lucrative trade in legal "highs".

+1 if i could. You speak the truth. In saying that, im off down there tomorro. Its only <100 metres away from my home.

Wertz wrote: »

As for the march itself? Pointless in the extreme...sorry to be cynical but that's the reality of it. General attitudes in this country rail against people that want to go against the grain, particularly those who are seen as stupid, sluggish, giggling, lazy, red-eyed druggies/hippies with only their own selfish interests (ie getting stoned with no consequences) at heart.

I disagree. Marching can be so powerful and gains so much attention that they went out of their way to ban marching outside parliament in England. At least they know that some people believe the current laws arent worth a fuk and some peoples lungs hurt from the fiberglass.

Jesus though, if i had a cent for every gullible idiot that gave me the "but its illegal" argument........

Wertz wrote: »

Mass non compliance with drug laws is the only way to force changes in legislation...they can't put the whole populace of drug users in jail....where would they put the real criminals?

Seems like a good idea, cept im a clumsy whore and id be dropping the soap. Im probably a bit bi though, if he was nice...maybe. But thats the evil satanic smoke making me near-half homosexual.

Jah bless.

bubonicus

passive wrote: »

Uh.. Take it to the "wannabe mod" forum?

Ditto

but you missed my point. no harm.


Best of luck with the march guys.

javaboy

Good luck to all you marijuana fans marching in the rain today. Shine on you crazy diamonds.

Varkov

I am completely against marijuana. My cousin, once, he smokes a "spliff" and he laughed himself to death!

robby^5

As another cannabis user I support any effort to leaglize it, especially for medical purposes as I know someone who smokes it to deal with medical depression as well as other medication, I'd go but I have work

bubonicus

Varkov wrote: »

I am completely against marijuana. My cousin, once, he smokes a "spliff" and he laughed himself to death!

I did that once. But let me tell you, it was no laughing matter.

The Mighty Ken

Ah maaaaaaaaaaan. I just woke up. I, like, tooooootally missed the march, maaaaaan. Dude, I got the munchies.

Davidius

I think I read somebody in here call it a hobby.

If smoking a weed is a hobby then how come people tell me that eating crisps isn't a hobby!? The bastards.

Don't really see why anybody would be so committed, don't see much point to it either. Besides if we legalised it then all of our tourists would be stoners like Harold and Kumar, which wasn't a very good film. :pac:

robby^5

Sominking marijuana isnt baaaaaaaaaad, mmmkay.

Its no worse than alchohol really, it will be legalized someday, prohibition wont last forever. But really its so easy to get in this country it doesnt really matter anyway.

I could probably guarantee that if we replaced every pub in the country with a cafe that sold weed we'd see a dramatic decrease in violent crime... and a sudden increase in the snack food industry!

Davidius

robby^5 wrote: »

Its no worse than alchohol really

I've fought Dr. Alcohol on my many crime fighting adventures but he isn't nearly as evil as the illegal drugs doctor guys. Prof. Cocaine murders puppies.

Phaetonman

who want to see it legalized for Medical users mainly, it has been tested in differant countrys and they seem happy with the way it's working,

Stop trying to legitamise weed useage using medicine as an excuse.

You want to legalise it to smoke and get high. Nothing wrong with that just hate when people pretend otherwise.

robby^5

Davidius wrote: »

I've fought Dr. Alcohol on my many crime fighting adventures but he isn't nearly as evil as the illegal drugs doctor guys. Prof. Cocaine murders puppies.

Your confused about your nemisis good sir, Cocaine and Marijuana are two very different things.

Phaetonman wrote: »

Stop trying to legitamise weed useage using medicine as an excuse.

You want to legalise it to smoke and get high. Nothing wrong with that just hate when people pretend otherwise.

Speaking frome experience, people can benefit from medicinal marijuana, it is a valid point, although I doubt everyone ta the protest just wants that legalized and would probably want it further legalized.

JC 2K3

I saw the youtube videos of last year. Needless to say, I wont be attending.

Irishcrx wrote: »

I don't do drugs never will the likes of E, acid, coke, heroin is a differant issue altogether seperating them from Marijuana is the first step.

No it's fúcking not. This is what písses me off about dumbass stoners. You think that weed is this harmless, wonderful substance with no downside to it and that other drugs are totally different to it. Firstly, you do do drugs if you do weed and alcohol. And secondly, what evidence do you have to say that weed is so less harmful than E, acid, coke etc. that it should be legalised and they shouldn't? As far as I'm concerned, weed is no more or less harmful than any other commonly used recreational drug. Just because you can't overdose on it doesn't mean it's inherently less harmful than any other drug.

All that said, drugs fascinate me and I read about them constantly and take them on occasion. I do believe in their legalisation, but not the exclusive legalisation of weed.

Phaetonman

I don't do drugs never will the likes of E, acid, coke, heroin is a differant issue altogether seperating them from Marijuana is the first step.

That's rubbish.

I'm a big drug user and I've done pretty much everything bar heroin. The only time I ever freaked out on drugs was with two space cakes and I had to get medical attention for it.
And acid is one of the safest drugs around probably more so than weed which causes lung cancer.

the_syco

Has anyone died from drinking too much alcohol? Yes. Can the same be said about weed?

Redpunto

Phaetonman wrote: »

Stop trying to legitamise weed useage using medicine as an excuse.

You want to legalise it to smoke and get high. Nothing wrong with that just hate when people pretend otherwise.

Was just thinking that myself,,,thats all the excuses I hear,,,its not for medicamal (sp?) reasons people are marching,,its for their own self interest. Each to his own though, if ya wanna smoke, go ahead but stop using people with serious life illnesses as a reason for it to be legalised just so yes can get the munchies.

Scubadevils

Well surely if the argument exists in the first place that marijuana has medicinal benefits then it should be also put forward - regardless of the fact that the individuals involved in the march smoke it for other reasons?

keen

JC 2K3 wrote: »

I saw the youtube videos of last year. Needless to say, I wont be attending.


No it's fúcking not. This is what písses me off about dumbass stoners. You think that weed is this harmless, wonderful substance with no downside to it and that other drugs are totally different to it. Firstly, you do do drugs if you do weed and alcohol. And secondly, what evidence do you have to say that weed is so less harmful than E, acid, coke etc. that it should be legalised and they shouldn't? As far as I'm concerned, weed is no more or less harmful than any other commonly used recreational drug. Just because you can't overdose on it doesn't mean it's inherently less harmful than any other drug.

All that said, drugs fascinate me and I read about them constantly and take them on occasion. I do believe in their legalisation, but not the exclusive legalisation of weed.

Cannabis is a drug just like E coke Acid etc. but your wrong to say that weed is no more or less harmful then any other commonly used recreational drug.

Have a look a someone who's been snorting coke for years and compare that to someone that's been smoking cannabis for years and tell me that they are the same.

Why would goverments class drugs if all drugs had equal effects and just had different highs?

spudington16

Irishcrx wrote: »

It happened last year and we had a great turnout and atmosphere, no not many nackers at it mainly people who are serious about the issue , who want to see it legalized for Medical users mainly.

I love how you state "medical use mainly" (my emphasis), even given the fact that most, if not all, of the people attending the march won't seek it for medical use, but recreational.

dlofnep

I don't smoke, but I also don't see anything wrong with the occasional toke. If fags and beer is legal, hash should be too. I've never seen a stoner break up the kentucky on a saturday night.

Fremen

JC 2K3 wrote: »

And secondly, what evidence do you have to say that weed is so less harmful than E, acid, coke etc. that it should be legalised and they shouldn't?

Well, I don't have any links to medical trials, but I think it's pretty reasonable to say that marijuana is a whole lot safer than many other drugs. As you said, it's very difficult to overdose on it. The effects wear off in an hour (unlike LSD or magic mushrooms, say), and it doesn't put strain on the heart the way many stimulants do.

Scubadevils

Marijuana is far less harmful than cocaine, E, acid, heroin etc but is in itself potentially harmful if taken frequently. Most people I have known that smoke frequently are less ambitious/driven and tend basically to give less of a sh*t about life in general. That said, I see nothing wrong with it in moderation as with anything else.

syklops

I personally know someone who died from having half an E tab. We all know someone who died as a result of smoking or drink.

Deaths related to cannbis are very rare. Excessive use of it is like excessive use of anything. I know a person who drinks nothing but coke(coca cola), and it affects his personality. He is wired all the time. He is like someone on speed, and this affects his relationships and his job. Should coke(cola) be made illegal?

robby^5

I see no reason to be completely opposed to legalization of marijuana other than the gateway drug hypothesis, which is sort of worrying, the idea that since marijuana's high isnt that strong for some people, it leads them to try stronger much more dangerous drugs instead.

Also, before anyone says it NO marijuana is not addictive, however as with anything people can get pyschologically addicted to it.

There is no doubt in my mind that someday we'll see marijuana legalized in the same fashion as alchohol, it being leagalzied for medicial use is the first step, because it shows that it has a positive aspect to it and will probably change peoples opinions on the matter.

invincibleirish

Jeez i wish there was a forum where this could be discussed in a non mindnumbing manner

Hmmm...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055202432

Timans

Treating medical depression with weed?

I hear chewing uranium is good for treating cancer as well.

the_syco

Felixdhc wrote: »

Most people I have known that smoke frequently are less ambitious/driven and tend basically to give less of a sh*t about life in general.

Most people I know like this were like this before they started smoing weed.

=-=

It's less harmfull than tabacco, but cause more harm, as weed burns at a higher temperature, and also when inhaled it's mainly held in the lungs longer.

=-=

I support it going legal, but only for people over 21.

Fremen

syklops wrote: »

I personally know someone who died from having half an E tab. We all know someone who died as a result of smoking or drink.

Deaths related to cannbis are very rare. Excessive use of it is like excessive use of anything. I know a person who drinks nothing but coke(coca cola), and it affects his personality. He is wired all the time. He is like someone on speed, and this affects his relationships and his job. Should coke(cola) be made illegal?

Ecstasy deaths are pretty damn rare, too (unless you read the red-tops). You sure it was really ecstasy?

Auvers

syklops wrote: »

Deaths related to cannbis are very rare

can you provide an example???

Fremen

Auvers wrote: »

can you provide an example???

An example of someone not dying? That's probably not too tough.

Fremen

Here's one of about seventeen million quotes, if you're still interested:

"In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within the supervised routine of medical care."

Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition," [Docket #86-22], (September 6, 1988), p. 57

Scubadevils

the_syco wrote: »

Most people I know like this were like this before they started smoing weed.

Good point actually!

syklops

Fremen wrote: »

Ecstasy deaths are pretty damn rare, too (unless you read the red-tops). You sure it was really ecstasy?

Yes I am.

http://archives.tcm.ie/thekingdom/2003/10/09/story10973.asp

invincibleirish

the_syco wrote: »

Most people I know like this were like this before they started smoing weed.

+1, tis a genuinely accurate observation.

Davidius

robby^5 wrote: »

Your confused about your nemisis good sir, Cocaine and Marijuana are two very different things.

Marijuana is his door troll and occasionally foreign minister. Diplomatic immunity makes him quite the foe.

ProVox

ProVox wrote: »

Are you serious? Man thats a weak attempt at invalidating a whole argument. In that case why not donate all the money we'd spend on alcohol or cars, or new clothes or luxury items??

Granted the people of burma need help, but cop the **** on

Think before you post man

Your telling me to cop on ? This is a march being organise to legalize a drug. So you can sit around and get stoned. Why dont all these people march for something to help the world ? ?
Yes there is the pont that MJ is not that bad , but it can lead to other drug abuse. Like as you say Alcohal , some people can drink but there are alot out there that cant. They become Alcoholics. This affects them it affects their family and people around them. Why add to it with MJ ?

The point i was trying to make is why march for somthing that does more harm to somebody's life then good ?

JC 2K3

keen wrote: »

Have a look a someone who's been snorting coke for years and compare that to someone that's been smoking cannabis for years and tell me that they are the same.

The same? No. I didn't say they were the same. However, one might be a waster with no job, drained of all motivation and living a shít life just smoking weed all day, whereas the other one might be a waster with doing nothing with thier life but trying to get their next fix. Of course both might be healthy individuals, having taken their respecitve drugs in moderation.

keen wrote: »

Why would goverments class drugs if all drugs had equal effects and just had different highs?

The government classes drugs according to whatever agenda they're trying to push, not by effects or potential harm.

syklops wrote: »

Yes I am.

http://archives.tcm.ie/thekingdom/2003/10/09/story10973.asp

No info in that suggests her death was directly related to MDMA, ie. Ecstasy. What they call "ecstasy" in that link could have been PMA or something else likely to be fatal. There's also a chance that it was water intoxication (which is a cause of ecstasy related deaths very often, due to the bullshít "you can't drink too much water on ecstasy" advice which is commonly circulated).

This is one of the main reasons why I believe drugs should be legalised. If this poor girl had gotten proper MDMA from a regulated source, knew the dosage she was taking and knew how much water to drink, then she would probably be still alive today.

robby^5

Marijuana should be legalized.

a) Because its a pointless ban, marijuana is only as dangerous as alchohol or tabacco, and only if its abused, so why the double standard? Its only a gateway drug because the people selling it provide that gateway to harder drugs.

b) It will take power away from criminals, allow the government to regulate its sale and who sells it and they can put an age limit on it. Not to mention they can tax it ( )

If weed was sold in say Starbucks then you remove people from the drug community, reducing the risk of being offered or seeking out harder drugs at some stage.

Not everyone who smokes weed is a stoner, just like not everyone who drinks alchohol is an alchoholic. It can be the same for a lot of drugs, but there would be a prevalence of dependancy with addictive drugs such as cocaine, whereas you can only get pyschologically addicted to weed (you can get pyschologically addicted to anything)

keen

JC 2K3 wrote: »

The same? No. I didn't say they were the same. However, one might be a waster with no job, drained of all motivation and living a shít life just smoking weed all day, whereas the other one might be a waster with doing nothing with thier life but trying to get their next fix. Of course both might be healthy individuals, having taken their respecitve drugs in moderation.


The government classes drugs according to whatever agenda they're trying to push, not by effects or potential harm.

As far as I'm concerned, weed is no more or less harmful than any other commonly used recreational drug. Just because you can't overdose on it doesn't mean it's inherently less harmful than any other drug.

Am I missing something here, you believe weed is on par with coke e and acid in terms of how harmful it is?

I'm saying that's not true based on how toxic the drug is, weed isn't as bad for you as coke e or acid that's a fact not an opinion.

Class A's are classed that way because they are believed to do the most harm not because of a certain agenda.

joeybloggs

joeybloggs wrote: »

For da bhoys who wants to come an support da cause of baitin da **** into the hippi's, We are meeting in da big gardin of rememberance tomorrow at 2.25 PM , not the big posh wan with da lake, da other wan near Berties gaf. Bring pipes, knifes anything you can get your hands on, hoping for a good turnout and good support. Maybe even convince some people to support our troubles of keeping these hippi's down.

S'later lads.

Alrite boys well done today.There was only one hippi lad there but we gave him a good chase.:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIQz6YcFgQ4

Phaetonman

Class A's are classed that way because they are believed to do the most harm not because of a certain agenda.

Stick this up your arse and smoke it.

Governement drug classifications are meaningless crap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5230006.stm#drugs

keen

Phaetonman wrote: »

Stick this up your arse and smoke it.

Governement drug classifications are meaningless crap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5230006.stm#drugs

That's a two year old article you have there.

I don't agree with a lot of the classifactions, what I'm saying is that goverment class them in order of what they believe to be the most harmful. Note I used the word "they" there, this isn't my opinion.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/drugs/drugs-law/Class-a-b-c/

I'd say my link is more accurate nowa days.

Class A, B and C drugs are termed as controlled substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, with Class A being those considered most harmful

JC 2K3

keen wrote: »

Am I missing something here, you believe weed is on par with coke e and acid in terms of how harmful it is?

I'm saying that's not true based on how toxic the drug is, weed isn't as bad for you as coke e or acid that's a fact not an opinion.

If you're basing harmfulness on toxicity no matter how much is ingested, then weed is no worse than acid.
If you're basing harmfulness on toxicity at a sensible dose, then weed is no more harmful than acid, E or heroin.

However, toxicity isn't the be all and end all of harmfulness.

If you base harmfulness on addiction potential, then weed is more harmful than E or acid.
If you base harmfulness on long term impact of moderate usage (not taking addiction potential into account) then weed is probably no more harmful than E, acid, coke or heroin.
If you base harmfulness on long term impact of heavy usage, then it's really debatable. Long term, heavy use of any drug is generally quite harmful.

Weed isn't particularly harmful IMO, but it's not so harmless as to be considered much less harmful than any other illegal drug.

keen wrote: »

Class A's are classed that way because they are believed to do the most harm not because of a certain agenda.

Cannabis was upgraded to a class B in Britain the other day despite the government's advisory board on drugs, consisting of scientists, almost unanimously voting to keep it class C. In the US cannabis is schedule 1.

A group of reputable scientists published this study in Britain 2 years ago. See cannabis? Yup, it's 6 places above ecstasy and 2 places above acid. Now I know one can't base their entire opinion on one study, but what this shows is that cannabis is not universally considered to be less harmful than all other commonly used recreational drugs, and that governments' classifcation systems bear little relation to scientific or medical fact.

Phaetonman

That's a two year old article you have there.

So what its still valid. These are independant scientists who made this study and not some government body.

Your link is rubbish.

keen

JC 2K3 wrote: »

If you're basing harmfulness on toxicity no matter how much is ingested, then weed is no worse than acid.
If you're basing harmfulness on toxicity at a sensible dose, then weed is no more harmful than acid, E or heroin.

However, toxicity isn't the be all and end all of harmfulness.

If you base harmfulness on addiction potential, then weed is more harmful than E or acid.
If you base harmfulness on long term impact of moderate usage (not taking addiction potential into account) then weed is probably no more harmful than E, acid, coke or heroin.
If you base harmfulness on long term impact of heavy usage, then it's really debatable.

Weed isn't particularly harmful IMO, but it's not so harmless as to be considered much less harmful than any other illegal drug.


Cannabis was upgraded to a class B in Britain the other day despite the government's advisory board on drugs, consisting of scientists, almost unanimously voting to keep it class C. In the US cannabis is schedule 1.

A group of reputable scientists published this study in Britain 2 years ago. See cannabis? Yup, it's 6 places above ecstasy and 2 places above acid. Now I know one can't base their entire opinion on one study, but what this shows is that cannabis is not universally considered to be less harmful than all other commonly used recreational drugs, and that governments' classifcation systems bear little relation to scientific or medical fact.

Over the space of year:

Smoke weed at the weekend - will do little or no harm.

Snort coke at the weekend - potential to cause a lot of harm

That's what I'm comparing how harmful a drug is based on how people acutally take drugs and what I've seen around me. I've seen coke destroy people within a year, I've seen people smoke cannabis for years and live a happy life.

Don't get me wrong I don't believe cannabis causes no harm at all, but I don't think it can be compared to coke and e in terms of how harmful it is.

I've said already that I don't agree with the way the goverments class a lot of drugs my point was that all drugs don't have the potental to cause the same amount of harm.