Legalising cannibas to cure the resession?

ScumLord

starflake wrote: »

You seem like a good person Auvers your kids will be good people too I'm not saying don't legalise cannabis here I'm just saying we need to research it in every which way possible before doing so. It has worked out fine in Holland but knowing the famous Irish culture of excess we should be very careful before doing anything drastic, y'know

Excessive cannabis use isn't going to have nearly the same effect on people and society that drink does. The worst thing (imo) that can happen if you do to much weed is you become almost immune to the high it produces.

meditraitor

ScumLord wrote: »

The worst thing (imo) that can happen if you do to much weed is you become almost immune to the high it produces.

This is certainly a good point and is proven in the Dutch model, the THC content in marajauna has more than doubled between 1998 and present day in amsterdam coffe shops

starflake

ScumLord wrote: »

Excessive cannabis use isn't going to have nearly the same effect on people and society that drink does. The worst thing (imo) that can happen if you do to much weed is you become almost immune to the high it produces.

What happens then if you can't get the same high that you used to? do you stop smoking it? sorry i'm ignorant to all of this

starflake

Personal liberty.

That is all.

starflake wrote:

What happens then if you can't get the same high that you used to? do you stop smoking it? sorry i'm ignorant to all of this

Yes. As with almost all psychoactive substances (including alcohol and prescription drugs), chronic use will cause the person to develop a tolerance due to down-regulation of the receptors. The solution is to stop for a while.

ScumLord

meditraitor wrote: »

This is certainly a good point and is proven in the Dutch model, the THC content in marajauna has more than doubled between 1998 and present day in amsterdam coffe shops

That's also been urged on by the likes of the cannabis cup and competition. It is bad over all for the cannabis user, like pointed out already by others the anitphycotics and anticarcinogens go down when THC content goes up. That's only going to get worse while people grow outside of any regulation.

chachabinx

meditraitor wrote: »

This thread has gone off topic a bit guys, I am anti legalising drugs but Im willing to listen and maybe debate with anybody who can give a good reason to legalise Cannabis.

Anyone?

Money going to government
Not going into offshore bank accounts
Non-contaminated & regulated weed
A numours amount of jobs being created
Loads of hip cafe's taking up where shops/pubs & resaurants have closed down
Sickening the drug dealers of the country
Taking young adults off the streets
Tourism

ScumLord

starflake wrote: »

What happens then if you can't get the same high that you used to? do you stop smoking it? sorry i'm ignorant to all of this

I do. After you build up a tolerance it doesn't really matter how much you smoke your not going to get high.

chachabinx

meditraitor wrote: »

This is certainly a good point and is proven in the Dutch model, the THC content in marajauna has more than doubled between 1998 and present day in amsterdam coffe shops

I've been smoking 7 years & that is completely untrue... its always going to get you stoned... I dunno where that came from but I still get as stoned now as I did back in the day...

starflake

ScumLord wrote: »

I do. After you build up a tolerance it doesn't really matter how much you smoke your not going to get high.

So what happens then? Do you drink instead do you smoke to get high? I don't mean you personally I mean 'people'.

Hauk

meditraitor wrote: »

It wont cure the recession, only a nut would think that:D

Ah but it would help

I'd love to have a decent debate, but every time one of these comes up, it descends into "Who has the moral high ground?".

I am of the personal opinion that it would bring agricultural, industrial, medicinal and recreational benefits to Ireland. It's an untapped industry, and any modern government with an eye on economic trends should be willing to at least put the debate on the table.

I'm just after reading the National Drug Strategy that was launched today. 70% of the "Steering Group"(I have no idea who these people are) were in favour of the medicinal use:

From the National Drug Strategy PDF wrote:

The Steering Group considered the legislative
framework governing illicit substances. Most
were not in favour of legalising, decriminalising
or changing/redefining the legal status of
certain illicit drugs (cannabis was the focus
of most discussion in this context). In these
discussions, it was pointed out that findings
from the Drug Prevalence Surveys of 2002/03
and 2006/0715
16 indicated that approximately
70% of those surveyed were of the opinion
that recreational use of cannabis should not
be permitted (support for the medicinal use
of cannabis was about 70% over the two
surveys).

Yet 70% were against the recreational use.

I haven't delved too much into the document. I've only searched the document for "cannabis" and read the associated paragraphs/sections.

I could go on and on and on, but my main point is: I would consider there to be far more benefits for the cannabis industry being taxed and regulated, which would aid the economy in it's recovery.

Hauk

ScumLord

starflake wrote: »

So what happens then? Do you drink instead do you smoke to get high? I don't mean you personally I mean 'people'.

I don't know, watch tv, read a book, internet, my life doesn't revolve around smoking spliffs and I don't smoke 24/7. I consider myself a stoner because of the culture and everything that goes with it it's not just purely about smoking weed. Although that is a major part of it.

meditraitor

chachabinx wrote: »

Money going to government

Ok, fair enough. But how much does the government have to reinvest? Social care, health awareness, treatment? and general health care (if usage increases)

chachabinx wrote: »

Not going into offshore bank accounts

Not relevent

chachabinx wrote: »

Non-contaminated & regulated weed

Who grows it and were? The security on this type of operation would be enormous

chachabinx wrote: »

A numours amount of jobs being created

Would this industry be new or replace jobs in other industrys i.e drinks industry

chachabinx wrote: »

Loads of hip cafe's taking up where shops/pubs & resaurants have closed down

But the shops and restaurants are closing because people have no money, thats not going to change

chachabinx wrote: »

Sickening the drug dealers of the country

Cannabis is probably only #3 in terms of the money drug dealer make from their Business

chachabinx wrote: »

Taking young adults off the streets

Thats not going to change, plenty of smokers on the street.

chachabinx wrote: »

Tourism

This is the tricky one, drug tourism is in my opinion something we could do without.
Maybe just sell it to residents (like they plan to do in amsterdam very soon)


Im still not convinced but fair play

chachabinx

starflake wrote: »

So what happens then? Do you drink instead do you smoke to get high? I don't mean you personally I mean 'people'.

People automatically think that you would go to somethin else but the thing is cannabis is in a league of it own... its not like alcohol & hard drugs... its different...
I think that if cannibis didn't exist at all the same people would be doin the same drugs...
Its not about what gets you high its about people being curious... I was always curious about drug & I done them... I went through a phase & I stopped it... I have friends that smoke cannabis & wouldn't touch another drug & then I have friends that would touch hard drugs & don't smoke cannabis... its about what your into not this "doesn't get you high anymore" crap!

meditraitor

chachabinx wrote: »

I've been smoking 7 years & that is completely untrue... its always going to get you stoned... I dunno where that came from but I still get as stoned now as I did back in the day...

Whats untrue? the THC concentration in marajuana sold in amsterdam coffe shops has doubled in recent times. I **** you not!

From personal experience I can say that excessive and regular use does diminish the effect

marcsignal

humanji wrote: »

Is that drinks fault or peoples fault?

a combination of both i'd guess. alcohol has a tendancy to make many people aggressive, particularlly if you have a predisposition to aggression, just as smoke, possibly has potential to cause emotional/mental problems to people who have a predisposition to them.

personally i'd prefere to be dealing with a stoner, than an aggressive drunk, if i was a doorman or garda.

chachabinx

meditraitor wrote: »

Ok, fair enough. But how much does the government have to reinvest? Social care, health awareness, treatment? and general health care (if usage increases)



Not relevent



Who grows it and were? The security on this type of operation would be enormous



Would this industry be new or replace jobs in other industrys i.e drinks industry



But the shops and restaurants are closing because people have no money, thats not going to change



Cannabis is probably only #3 in terms of the money drug dealer make from their Business



Thats not going to change, plenty of smokers on the street.



This is the tricky one, drug tourism is in my opinion something we could do without.
Maybe just sell it to residents (like they plan to do in amsterdam very soon)


Im still not convinced but fair play

Reinvestment? People invest the government TAX

Social care? My point again.. its gettin smoked anyway so why not legalise it.

health awareness - we can do the usualy a few ads on TV.. won't cost much compared to the $$$$ from revenue

Treatment - My point again.. its gettin smoked anyway so why not legalise it.



can you explain why this is not relavent? Its cash leaving the country




And how do they do it in amsterdam? How do they produce cigarettes & alcohol here? Again the revenue will be much more than cost. Secuity fences & guards...



again no because people will still want to go out & have a few drinks and is smoking alot more benefitial to society & your health than drinking?




Yes but there is still millions being spend on cannabis... even those that do not work can still afford 50 quid a week for smoke... I've seen it... most of my male friends are living at home & out of work and the females that are all working still spendin as much this year as last year




-
yes but its still a MASSIVE amount even if its only 3rd



Yes but alot less if there is somewhere warm & cosy to go with a bit of atmosphere



We're not going to be shoving coke down there noses so can you please call it cannabis tourism. And it goes no harm in Amsterdam does it not. Is it better that people come here to get pissed out of their mind?.. And lets face it anyone that visits Dublin City is there for a party... and in fairness I've I had to be there all the time I think I'd be drunk/stoned all the time too

Pace2008

While it’s naive to believe that cannabis alone would be enough to bring us out of a recession that is largely caused by external forces, I would like to see it legalised (along with select other drugs) at some stage in the future, for any number of personal and socioeconomic reasons that I couldn’t be arsed listing, and have been done to death already. However, I can’t see it happening any time soon for a number of reasons.

Firstly, and possibly most crucially, we live in a society that has been dominated by the Church until relatively recent years. I believe that there’s a correlation between the influence of religion on any given country and the harshness of punitive drug laws as well as the general attitude the public holds towards mind-altering chemicals. It’s based around the notion that achieving an inordinate amount of pleasure is inherently bad, even if doing so has no ill-effect on those around you - a personal sin as such. If you go back fifty years you’ll find plenty of people held the idea of casual, premarital sex in similar disregard. As the Church’s grasp over Ireland loosens I can see a shift in the public’s attitude towards the issue - it’s safe to say that the current generation has a more liberal view towards drugs.

Secondly, we have a government that is either unable or unwilling to implement pragmatic solutions for anything (and this is not exclusive to drugs) - ban/tax/ban/tax ad nauseum.

In addition, if Ireland was to take the initiative and introduce legalisation, we could have the issue of drug tourism to deal with. If weed became legal here, you can be sure every scumbag from the UK (along with all the respectable stoners) would be getting their 10c Ryanair flights over to Dublin every second weekend, and bringing trouble with them. If it was
The other way around, I think Britain would have no bother handling Irish troublemakers abroad, but Ireland is a small country and sudden influx of undesirables from a nation with a population nearly fifteen times greater than our own could present difficulties. It’s a situation that may not even arise but it’s one of the more compelling arguments I’ve heard from the anti-drug lobby over here.

faceman wrote: »

I always hate the way the pro druggies always spout medicinal medicine or other benefits as if it the only and best offering to treat an ailment. Its mind altering therefore doesnt offer any treatment of most conditions it is claimed to help.

Your comment doesn’t really justify a response but I’d advise you to look at the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines. Ketamine, nitrous oxide, morphine, and a bunch of Benzos are listed there (to name but a few) – compounds which should fit your definition of ‘mind-altering’. Perhaps you’d like to contact them and tell them they’re wrong? This is a perfect example of morality getting in the way of objectivity.

Where exactly is this clean hash and weed to come from? Will a protected domestic supply produce a purification industry? Should we allocate the resources of a state department to policing revenue and licensing vendors? What about the added costs of acquiring pure substance, would that drive up black market competition for contaminated cheap alternatives?

Purification? What are you talking about? It’s a plant. You grow it, dry out the buds, and smoke/vaporise it. There’s no purification process for potatoes that I’m aware of, and Google isn’t turning up many relevant results. The only reason contaminated cannabis is out there is due to its illicit nature and the desire of dealers to make profit, which causes it to be ‘cut’ with impurities along the chain of supply. In a regulated market there would be no reason to provide a contaminated product.

As for marijuana, are you telling me that we are able to distinguish quality without some sort of acquired taste/direction? Completely impossible without some sort of learning process. It is enough to assume taste will regulate any potential trade in contaminated marijuana?

See above. I can’t see how there’d be a market for a contaminated product in a regulated environment. Or am I missing your point completely?

efla wrote: »

Smoking is not good for you, and smoking marijuana less so. Despite the consistent irony of middle class 'campaigners' effectively justifying their want of an easier supply through exchequer gains, and completely ignoring the real possibility of a burdened healthcare system through long-term smoking related physical and mental complications.

I await your citations, because I dont think you have any that will justify it. When did smoking in any form, outside the context of experimental medical control, become good for you?

Creating a legal market, and as another poster suggested, actively promoting it through coffee shops - it is reasonable to assume that more would end up smoking than now. (I wasn't talking about second hand smoke)

I don’t agree with your general sentiments. Your view on what’s good and bad for society is a bit cold and seems to take the human out of humanities, if you’ll excuse the trope. Do you not think the fact that getting high is enjoyable factors in there somewhere? I know ‘good times while stoned’ is something of an intangible factor and isn’t exactly as measurable as ‘respiratory difficulties caused by chronic cannabis abuse’ but it has to count for something. I’ll be the first to put my hands up and admit my stance towards legalisation isn’t entirely based around some altruistic desire to ameliorate my country’s economy – I’d also be partial to a bit of legal, cheap, good-quality weed, and I don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with this motive . Of course, if legalisation was to decimate the country it’d obviously be a bad thing, but I don’t think that it would happen, even in our culture of excess. Despite all the talk of cannabis causing mental illness, it’s yet to be ascertained in any real way. Meta-analyses have shown a correlation between schizophrenia and cannabis consumption, but so too have they shown that schizophrenics smoke an inordinate amount of cigarettes, and take more drugs in general than the average person. There's also been no proven link to date between cannabis use and cancer, despite the fact that there's more carcinogens in weed than cigarettes. It'd be foolish to assume that there aren't potential dangers associated with weed - it can be an insidious drug that can affect your life for the worse if abused, despite what the pro-leglalisation lobby (whom I also don't trust) may say - but I think the potential economic benefits, combined with the importance of one's liberties, outweigh them.

Mrmoe

Can we not just legalize brownies then which would result in no smoking related diseases.

Ostrom

Pace2008 wrote: »

Purification? What are you talking about? It’s a plant. You grow it, dry out the buds, and smoke/vaporise it. There’s no purification process for potatoes that I’m aware of, and Google isn’t turning up many relevant results. The only reason contaminated cannabis is out there is due to its illicit nature and the desire of dealers to make profit, which causes it to be ‘cut’ with impurities along the chain of supply. In a regulated market there would be no reason to provide a contaminated product.

See above. I can’t see how there’d be a market for a contaminated product in a regulated environment. Or am I missing your point completely?

My point, or question was how such a trade could be regulated - with the added expense of pure weed (I am assuming it is more expensive - correct me if I'm wrong, I honestly dont know), I cant see trade in cheaper contaminated substances taking much of a hit, if anything the lifting of restrictions would enable easier movement of pure product to be processed - again, I am assuming this is something that can be done after growing - I dont know how the processing works. The purification question was in relation to the poster above, who seemed to be suggesting that 'taste' would act as a regulator and eliminate competition from alternatives - I was asking if he meant post-processing recovery of clean product - the suggestion being that current suppplies are mixed with other products. Also, purification in relation to monitoring whatever an established standard of 'good product' would be, would likely be costly (all my assumptions).

Pace2008 wrote: »

I don’t agree with your general sentiments. Your view on what’s good and bad for society is a bit cold and seems to take the human out of humanities, if you’ll excuse the trope. Do you not think the fact that getting high is enjoyable factors in there somewhere?

No, I couldn't support anything that attempted to promote or introduce something that is by nature damaging - enjoyment does not mitigate. Obviously I'm biased in this respect.

Pace2008 wrote: »

I know ‘good times while stoned’ is something of an intangible factor and isn’t exactly as measurable as ‘respiratory difficulties caused by chronic cannabis abuse’ but it has to count for something. I’ll be the first to put my hands up and admit my stance towards legalisation isn’t entirely based around some altruistic desire to ameliorate my country’s economy – I’d also be partial to a bit of legal, cheap, good-quality weed, and I don’t think there’s anything particularly wrong with this motive . Of course, if legalisation was to decimate the country it’d obviously be a bad thing, but I don’t think that it would happen, even in our culture of excess. Despite all the talk of cannabis causing mental illness, it’s yet to be ascertained in any real way. Meta-analyses have shown a correlation between schizophrenia and cannabis consumption, but so too have they shown that schizophrenics smoke an inordinate amount of cigarettes, and take more drugs in general than the average person. There's also been no proven link to date between cannabis use and cancer, despite the fact that there's more carcinogens in weed than cigarettes.

This is what I would be most concerned about - the economic argument tends to rest on misinterpreted evidence - positive effects on medical conditions = benefits in general etc.

Pace2008 wrote: »

It'd be foolish to assume that there aren't potential dangers associated with weed - it can be an insidious drug that can affect your life for the worse if abused, despite what the pro-leglalisation lobby (whom I also don't trust) may say - but I think the potential economic benefits, combined with the importance of one's liberties, outweigh them.

I have yet to see any reasonable justification on economic grounds for legalisation - there have been a few remarks thrown around, but nothing coherent. Someone posted an estimate on tax revenue above that was negligible.

Prof.Badass

efla wrote: »

Alcohol has developed differently (obviously) into a profitable enterprise - despite the fact that it also holds no significant long-term benefits (dont bother posting the weekly daily mail 'shot a day cures cancer' links), burdens our healthcare system with alcohol-related illnesses, indirect admissions due to induced violence, road deaths, and numerous effects at the level of family.

Strange view you have on alcohol there. I take it you don't drink.

Hypothetical scenario here; If you could somehow wish alcohol away with no side effects, would you do it?

See, I wouldn't see alcohol as having no long-term benifits. Yeah, I'm damaging my organs and shortening my lifespan, but by getting drunk every now and again with friends I'm enjoying my life a lot more. I honestly believe that getting to de-stress at the weekend is giving me a greater quality of life than i would have had otherwise.

jumpguy

chachabinx wrote: »

I am a young adult & nearly everyone I associate with smoke it... whether its in work.. college & friends in general... people have smoked it for years & its not going to stop EVER

Birds of a feather...

El_Dangeroso

One major reason to legalise is that you can determine the THC vs Cannabinoid content in the product you are buying.

At the moment, weed is bred to be higher and higher in THC thus diminishing the cannabinoid content.

Cannabinoids are anti-psychotic and balance the paranoia-inducing effects of THC.

So legalisation would allow the consumer to buy a better and safer product.

Also I think that Amsterdam should be looked upon as a lesson on how not to legalise weed as they have a bizarre system when coffee shops buy illegally through the back door and sell legally out the front. It's not really legal, just 'tolerated'.

roneythetube

for those still refusing to believe that cannabis is medicine ...I give you


http://www.acmed.org/ - International Association for Cannabis as Medicine
and
http://cannabinoidsociety.org/ The International Cannabinoid Research Society

Get the facts on the cost of the War on Drugs here (financial cost - not to mention the destructive costs of prohibition on society)
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/54

why not http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6376 - marijuana and medicine
and http://www.treatingyourself.com/ is a great resource for those wanting to learn more about how to use this medicine.

evidence! sources! Peer reviewed!!!

this is only the tip of a very large iceberg. Instead of discussing what you think of all this why not read a little instead and inform yerself? I know these are discussion forums whose point is to 'discuss' but it is hard to discuss anything with folk reared on 40 years of 'War on Drugs' mis-information (read lies).
wake up and open yer eyes. Prohibition does not work. Its time for a change. Yes we can(nabis):D;)

DublinWriter

You seriously believe that Mary Harney would legalise something that would give her the munchies?

Ostrom

vinylmesh wrote: »

Strange view you have on alcohol there. I take it you don't drink.

Hypothetical scenario here; If you could somehow wish alcohol away with no side effects, would you do it?

Absolutely I would. That wasn't a view, just fact.

vinylmesh wrote: »

See, I wouldn't see alcohol as having no long-term benifits. Yeah, I'm damaging my organs and shortening my lifespan, but by getting drunk every now and again with friends I'm enjoying my life a lot more. I honestly believe that getting to de-stress at the weekend is giving me a greater quality of life than i would have had otherwise.

Are there really no alternatives? My life is no less enjoyable without alcohol, and that is from experience of both.

Kalashnikov_Kid

I haven't read the whole thread, but would just like to say that if we legalise cannabis as some sort of 'recession buster', we might as well introduce tax-break happy-hours in the pubs aswell to bring a bit of balance.

There seems to be a hippy myth out there that cannabis is 101% harmless in all cases - that is not true.

Roughly 10% of the population would be putting their mental health seriously at risk by taking up hash-smoking as an occupation - mainly depression, paranoia, schizophrenia and lethargic behaviour.

Of course you can say the same about alcohol, but just thought I'd make the point.

ScumLord

Kalashnikov_Kid wrote: »

I haven't read the whole thread, but...

You should have read the rest of the thread, and 10% is an exaggeration, try 1% or less. 10% is a huge number of people.

Prof.Badass

efla wrote: »

Absolutely I would. That wasn't a view, just fact.

I explained what i see as a long term benifit of alcohol. Regardless, the important thing is that your logic holds.

While i disagree with your views, they are consistent and i respect you for that. Fortunately for me, only a minority of people would find themselves agreeing with you when you take your argument to it's logical conclusion. Your chances of persuading the majority have just crashed.

Are there really no alternatives? My life is no less enjoyable without alcohol, and that is from experience of both.

Alternatives? Yes I would suggest ghb as it is completely non-toxic in the long term and is not associated with aggressive behavior the way alcohol is.

There was a call in england to legalise pagoclone as a safer alternative to alcohol. Sadly such an approach would be far too rational for this day and age.

InkSlinger67

I wouldn't want to be suffering DT's while reading this thread....a chap might start hallucinating thinking that cannabis is as easy to get in Ireland as a loaf of bread!

*Amber agrees with InkSlinger's rational observation*

God, I miss my Vicodin! :pac:

thomond2006

OP, what about Atari Jaguar?

c0rk3r

chachabinx wrote: »

Im not hurting anybody...

Why cant drug users just say "at the moment i am directly/indirectly funding criminality but with legalization i will no longer be doing so" instead we get this im hurting nobody nonsense.

pikachucheeks

I misread the title of the post as
"Lesbian cannibals to cure the recession?"

Oh, where is my mind!?

Kalashnikov_Kid

ScumLord wrote: »

You should have read the rest of the thread, and 10% is an exaggeration, try 1% or less. 10% is a huge number of people.

Not at all. It is widely regarded that around 10% of people have experienced a major depressive episode of some sort at least once throughout their lives.

Smoking it is enjoyable for most but if you or your family has any history of mental illness you'd be advised to stay clear. Even if you do find you're enjoying it, some negative effects could creep up on you, and you are far more vulnerable of this happening to you if you fall into the above category.

I don't care if cannabis hasn't ever killed anyone, technically. There are still some very real dangers.

FLYNN-DOG

faceman wrote: »

Im against it. Our healthcare system is already crippled by alcohol and cigarette related illnesses. We dont need an additional burden.

I always hate the way the pro druggies always spout medicinal medicine or other benefits as if it the only and best offering to treat an ailment. Its mind altering therefore doesnt offer any treatment of most conditions it is claimed to help.

Prohibition doesnt work but as we've seen with the government's attitude to dealing with smoking in Ireland, the numbers of young people taking up smoking has greatly fallen as a result, which benefits the individual and those around them. NOt to mention the health care system.

But if sitting in stoned off your face, disconnected from the real world is your thing, knock yourself out.

You sound ridiculously annoying and boring

Kipperhell

faceman wrote: »

Im against it. Our healthcare system is already crippled by alcohol and cigarette related illnesses. We dont need an additional burden.

.

The revenue from alcohol and tobacco probably support the healthcare system. If the government lost that revenue tomorrow the country would be truly in trouble. Adding a revenue stream would probably be a good idea.

If the government really wanted to remove the revenue from criminals they could legalise home growing and amounts for personal use. The legislation is just as much at fault as the users IMHO, if you are going to pass on blame.

Hauk

Kipperhell wrote: »

If the government really wanted to remove the revenue from criminals they could legalise home growing and amounts for personal use. The legislation is just as much at fault as the users IMHO, if you are going to pass on blame.

Ideally it would be great to re-direct that revenue from criminals into proper channels.

If you legalise home growing and amounts for personal use then it would seem illogical not to be able to run a business like a coffeeshop. It's the plant itself that's illegal, so you can't have one without the other.

On the business side of things, a potential retail outlet could argue that legislation which allows home growing and small amounts for personal use, is discriminating against business owners.

It's tricky as hell

The legislation on the books is utter tripe, and hinders everybody. From the Gardai to the guy at home playing Xbox and having a joint, they both know that the lengthy process of convicting someone for small amounts of cannabis is not feasible.

The substance has to be taken from the person and sent to the lab to be tested and confirmed to be cannabis. Then the person gets a summons and taken to court where the judge either gives them a stern talking to/a warning/or a fine.

In the National Drugs Strategy, it's mentioned in section 2.29, that 80% of convictions were for possession, and 20% for supply.

National Drugs Strategy Section 2.29 wrote:

There were some concerns amongst the Steering Group about the time being allocated by An Garda Síochána to what is perceived as less serious drug - related crime, such as the possession of cannabis for personal use. The Gardaí advise that about 20% of drugs crime relates to supply offences and 80% to possession. Supply offences generally involve much more time and resources. Furthermore, Gardaí cannot foretell the outcome of their
operations in advance.

It seems everyone is in agreement but don't want to budge :P

If only we could get some economists and scientists together with some legal people to actually flesh it out.

Irishcrx

This debate comes up at least once a month, they never will in the immediate future but if it ever happend they would tax the **** out of it anyway, so i'd grow my own if it was legal...it's easy enough to do..

faceman

Pace2008 wrote: »

Your comment doesn’t really justify a response but I’d advise you to look at the World Health Organisation’s list of essential medicines. Ketamine, nitrous oxide, morphine, and a bunch of Benzos are listed there (to name but a few) – compounds which should fit your definition of ‘mind-altering’. Perhaps you’d like to contact them and tell them they’re wrong? This is a perfect example of morality getting in the way of objectivity.

You missed my point. Whenever the pro camp want to legalise weed, medicinal benefits is one of the first and primary reasons for its legalisation yet is probably the furthest justification from their personal point of view for having it legalised.

FLYNN-DOG wrote: »

You sound ridiculously annoying and boring

Your post is retarded. Like your opinion.

Kipperhell wrote: »

The revenue from alcohol and tobacco probably support the healthcare system. If the government lost that revenue tomorrow the country would be truly in trouble. Adding a revenue stream would probably be a good idea..

I dont know if figures are availble on it, it would be useful to see. However given the inefficiencies already in the health care system and public service, im unconvinced that both ends meet.

Either way, suggesting adding an additional revenue stream at a cost to people's health seems somewhat ill thought out to me.

Daroxtar

It wont cure the recession but it will help us ignore the bullsh!t. Recession..pffft

NOGMaxpower

Its a well known fact that Dublin City Planning is based on Amsterdams model. Trams, waterways (recently reopened), pedestrianised roads, discussions on free bicycles for residents etc etc.

The debate on legalising blow has come up in the Dail before. Its a tough one for any government to sort out with Europe looking closely at any developments. There has been some big changes in Amsterdam recently with new laws on smoking in coffee shops and limiting the number of licenses on the sale of weed.

That said, its only a matter of time before it is legalised. The problem is convincing the wider neigh sayers that its a good idea. Ireland is known as a nation of piss heads, when actually in fact we're one of the biggest stoner countries in the EU.

Issues like

• Impact on health system
• Criminality
• Hordes of nasty tourists ruining our city centre etc

Doesn't really matter all. The health system is already impacted in a negitive way by the large number of Irish who already smoke pot so there's no difference at all. Whats more they are smoking sub standard hash and dodgey weed filled with glass = far worse for the health system. If it were legalised it would be controlled. The THC content would be goverened and priced accordingly and we wouldn't need ot be worried about other damaging toxins being added to give it flavour and body = positive impact on health system

Criminality, would take a massive hit. Since pot is their bread and butter they'd be missing out on millions. They would also be missing out on future customers of harder drugs since they would stay on weed and away form cocaine and heroine and even crack to a larger extent. = Positive on health and crime and tax revenues.

Hordes of nasty tourists, would be replaced with passive stoner types. Since most of the tourists hitting Ireland go bananas on drink. You never hear of a stoner getting into a street fight over a fallen kebab. Temple bar would see far less puke and broken glass on its street. Resteraunts, Take aways would have boom when all the stoners get the munchies. In short positives = less drunken crime on our streets so Garda can concentrate on bigger problems, less piss heads/injuries in AE so less cost in hospitals, extra revenue from late night food - munchies and increased tourism.

I fail to see any negitives that can't be rebutted with a positive.

chachabinx

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Its a well known fact that Dublin City Planning is based on Amsterdams model. Trams, waterways (recently reopened), pedestrianised roads, discussions on free bicycles for residents etc etc.

The debate on legalising blow has come up in the Dail before. Its a tough one for any government to sort out with Europe looking closely at any developments. There has been some big changes in Amsterdam recently with new laws on smoking in coffee shops and limiting the number of licenses on the sale of weed.

That said, its only a matter of time before it is legalised. The problem is convincing the wider neigh sayers that its a good idea. Ireland is known as a nation of piss heads, when actually in fact we're one of the biggest stoner countries in the EU.

Issues like

• Impact on health system
• Criminality
• Hordes of nasty tourists ruining our city centre etc

Doesn't really matter all. The health system is already impacted in a negitive way by the large number of Irish who already smoke pot so there's no difference at all. Whats more they are smoking sub standard hash and dodgey weed filled with glass = far worse for the health system. If it were legalised it would be controlled. The THC content would be goverened and priced accordingly and we wouldn't need ot be worried about other damaging toxins being added to give it flavour and body = positive impact on health system

Criminality, would take a massive hit. Since pot is their bread and butter they'd be missing out on millions. They would also be missing out on future customers of harder drugs since they would stay on weed and away form cocaine and heroine and even crack to a larger extent. = Positive on health and crime and tax revenues.

Hordes of nasty tourists, would be replaced with passive stoner types. Since most of the tourists hitting Ireland go bananas on drink. You never hear of a stoner getting into a street fight over a fallen kebab. Temple bar would see far less puke and broken glass on its street. Resteraunts, Take aways would have boom when all the stoners get the munchies. In short positives = less drunken crime on our streets so Garda can concentrate on bigger problems, less piss heads/injuries in AE so less cost in hospitals, extra revenue from late night food - munchies and increased tourism.

I fail to see any negitives that can't be rebutted with a positive.

Well done... what I've been trying to expain!

ScumLord

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

I fail to see any negitives that can't be rebutted with a positive.

I think weed would really suit Ireland down to the ground. We're supposed to be a relaxed country, we already have the theme tune (the green, green grass of home) and we need the revenue recreational, medical and industrial cannabis growing can bring.

Hauk

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Criminality, would take a massive hit. Since pot is their bread and butter they'd be missing out on millions. They would also be missing out on future customers of harder drugs since they would stay on weed and away form cocaine and heroine and even crack to a larger extent. = Positive on health and crime and tax revenues.

I fail to see any negatives that can't be rebutted with a positive.

Me too. Good points. Nothing I haven't read before, but well versed nonetheless.

I checked the seizures totals for cannabis herb and resin for 2007(from the National Drug Strategy PDF), which is: 2949.62KG

This equates to: 2,949,620 grams.

Times this by 9 euro per gram(Typical Dutch price for a gram).

€26,546,580

21% of that figure is: €5,707,514.7

Which is a lot of money into the Government coffers.

Edit: And that is of the stuff they seized. This doesn't represent the actual weight per annum that comes into the country undetected or home grown.

Wez

Some very good points made so far, good to see!

The problems on the health front, I think, are all over hyped. The same propaganda that made politicians bring in a blanket ban on ganja in 1937, was just as well researched as alot of the anti-legalise arguements. Just as people are saying there is a huge risk from smoking, that's from back in the day (near in time to when smoking tobacco was thought to be healthy), 21st century tokers use vaporizers, or eat it (most efficient with no health risk).

I've read alot of study's regarding health implications, and the general concensous is, only if you already have underlying mental health issues, can they present problems when consuming on a very regular basis. - But there are also reports stating how it can benefit mental illness, so maybe it's not even a valid arguement (seeing as this myth originated from the propaganda adverts made by William Randolph Hearst about 'potheads axing their family's, jumping from buildings etc').

And on a final note:

"Hemp is not only in direct competition with timber and petroleum, but also with many other industries throughout the world. Hemp offers wholesome and nutritious foodstuffs such as edible oil from the seeds, which are also used for making chocolate bars and other foods; renewable fiber for clothing and building. The original Levi jeans were made from hemp but lasted too long to be commercially viable; high grade papers, such as those used for bank notes, tissues, hand towels, and tea bags, where strength when wet is critical, and so much more. Cannabis is a medicine that was created by nature, producing powerful documented results without the side effects of the manufactured chemicals that the drug companies peddle during every television commercial break. Cannabis can even be a nice after work treat in the same way that a glass of beer or wine is enjoyed after a long day at the office."

Also, an interesting insight into the America's original stance on hemp.. Interesting how they never seem to bring this up..

lizzyvera

120_Minutes wrote: »

going rate for weed in my area is 3g fro 50 quid

This is another reason it should be legalised! You're wasting your money. Buy in ounces and refuse to pay more than €200 for 28g.

Pace2008

This is another reason it should be legalised! You're wasting your money. Buy in ounces and refuse to pay more than €200 for 28g.

I buy weed off the travellers and if I demended that rate I'd either be told where to go or get sold a bag of stems.

EDIT: Just worked it out, it's not actually as ridiculous as I previously thought.

Overheal

How will this cure the recession? A good tenth or more of the workforce is already home on the couch all day. You think offering them Marijuana is going to help them find a job any faster?

Irishcrx

It won't cure a recession , it might help and it would be deadly to have it legal. It should be anyway it grows naturaly and I have a right to smoke it, its not for the government to decide for me. Note I have problems with authority.

Kipperhell

Hauk wrote: »

Ideally it would be great to re-direct that revenue from criminals into proper channels.

If you legalise home growing and amounts for personal use then it would seem illogical not to be able to run a business like a coffeeshop. It's the plant itself that's illegal, so you can't have one without the other.

The law doesn't have to be logical. Alcohol is more dangerous but legal for example which isn't logical. It is illegal to make your own spirits but you can buy them in a supermarket. So you can easily make a law that is particular about running a business or a farm and home growing. Nothing very difficult.

It would eliminate tourist users yet reduce criminal activity/funding. Chances are it would certainly stop parents worrying extra about kids getting it. If you have some bring in a registration system for legal ownership you can't have people buying and claiming they grow it. Gateway drug to gardening rather than worse drugs

chachabinx

Wez wrote: »

Some very good points made so far, good to see!

The problems on the health front, I think, are all over hyped. The same propaganda that made politicians bring in a blanket ban on ganja in 1937, was just as well researched as alot of the anti-legalise arguements. Just as people are saying there is a huge risk from smoking, that's from back in the day (near in time to when smoking tobacco was thought to be healthy), 21st century tokers use vaporizers, or eat it (most efficient with no health risk).

I've read alot of study's regarding health implications, and the general concensous is, only if you already have underlying mental health issues, can they present problems when consuming on a very regular basis. - But there are also reports stating how it can benefit mental illness, so maybe it's not even a valid arguement (seeing as this myth originated from the propaganda adverts made by William Randolph Hearst about 'potheads axing their family's, jumping from buildings etc').

And on a final note:

"Hemp is not only in direct competition with timber and petroleum, but also with many other industries throughout the world. Hemp offers wholesome and nutritious foodstuffs such as edible oil from the seeds, which are also used for making chocolate bars and other foods; renewable fiber for clothing and building. The original Levi jeans were made from hemp but lasted too long to be commercially viable; high grade papers, such as those used for bank notes, tissues, hand towels, and tea bags, where strength when wet is critical, and so much more. Cannabis is a medicine that was created by nature, producing powerful documented results without the side effects of the manufactured chemicals that the drug companies peddle during every television commercial break. Cannabis can even be a nice after work treat in the same way that a glass of beer or wine is enjoyed after a long day at the office."

Also, an interesting insight into the America's original stance on hemp.. Interesting how they never seem to bring this up..

I thought that it was originally banned because it was ruining the cotton industry... thats what they told me in the museum in Amsterdam...

America's stance on hemp... weird one!.. Its legal under state law in California its legal for medical (which Arnie might change to just legal for everyone to help with the resession) but under federal law its illegal so the feds can just walk in & shut down coffee shops...

WELCOME TO AMERICA...DUH!