Cannabis should be legalized in Ireland To pull Our country out of ression

def

I'm assuming that this is a response to my post since it sortof relates. You should make use of the quote system though. Very useful to avoid confusion.

def wrote: »

mine (serious period which happend to coincide with my highest ever salery)was 32k and i definiately kranked up afternoon/weekend toking and trying things like buying cannaidian herb over the internet

And you were probably doing the same before you got the money increases, but with smaller amounts and different sources. At the end of the day, there is a limit for the amount that someone can smoke before they get cranky and annoyed with the overall existance. Its a bit like being unemployed and having no money. TV, computer games, and such are enjoyable for a while, but later become annoying except for the odd usage. Its the same with being a stoner. Everyone I know who has smoked for an substantial amount of time has reached a point where it becomes more annoying to smoke than not smoke.

i do think the demand is there( but were all just guessing theres no way to know for sure)

If the demand was there then the price of current amounts of cannabis would be much higher. While there is a decent amount of supply into Ireland of quality smoke, it would never be enough to satisfy a serious demand by people. hence its logical to assume, that the current demand matches the supply. Otherwise there would be a lot more drug dealers setting up shop in the country with major price hikes on the supply.

not at all, im confident that if the markets were seperated (through full regulation),and prohibition wasnt ruining the respect for the gardai and govenrment in general ,and there was some what of a choice of drugs you could eliminate demand for others , but even if ireland legalised heroin (unnesissary) we could do more to fight the taliban than any amount of hunter killer drones ,by hitting them where it hurts ...ther wallets,and it wouldnt be any where near as damaging to the user since there would be quality control and this could be said for what i would feel is the next most violent/dangerous market ,cocaine , help fight "terrorism"(violent extremisim) in south america , either way help the "lesser world"

Honestly, I don't give a flying **** about the Taliban... Its not my war. And the government(s) have no reason to expect respect because they're so inept right across the board from education, finance, right through to health. Don't even get me started with corruption. And lastly the Gardai have some respect, but they're limited by a rather ****ty justice system which releases or does a terrible job at rehabilitating the people they arrest letting them out again rather quickly.

Personally, I have the utmost respect for the Gardai as a whole. Some power tripping gob****es but mostly decent people doing a hard job.

BTW, while I'm a stoner I'm totally against harder drugs like Heroin. I've seen firsthand the affects on friends, and its a shockingly horrible drug. Anyone dealing/supplying it should be shot. That would reduce the supply quite a bit..

def

def wrote: »

prohibition ,public order? morality? it breeds disrespect for the law and loud old women from very young ages ,it is rotting our society at the roots you can tell because the leaves are wilting, and flowers are so few and small

Very poetic. And the point of it was?

hey second hand smoke isnt the same as reading somethings entrails, in anyway , if wine is part of mass why cant oil be part of a mass ,discrimination based in prejudice,(prejudie -to form an opinion with out considering all if any of the relevent information ,all negitive health reasons for supporting prohibition are invalid unless you factor in the possible methods for reduceing these ,through regulation ..mental illness for example ,seems to be completely due to the lack of labels(with cannabinoid profiles) and a want for qualitiy product( bud with no seeds ,glass etc) and a lack of choice in lower thc higher cbd products ,

fear of persecution ,lack of information in the useing public, few lads standing around shouting in dublin city center ,handing out a4 sheets ,which will also be in headshops , start the snow ball rollin

Huh? (and no I'm not stoned, and I doubt i would understand if I was)

then any other law prohibiting any other person would be discriminatory which the aressting gardai is supposed to oppose, and seek out and expose , what sort of responsibilities do judges have?

I'm pretty sure the role of the Gardai is to enforce the law, not determine whether its just or not. I'd guess we have other departments and focus groups responsible for that.

this a response to klaz in post 384 ,

I'm beginning to wonder if you were actually responding to me. Seems more to do with others posters points on religion than what i posted. Use the quote system. Its easy. I learned while drunk and have never forgotten it since.

O'Coonassa

Deleted User wrote: »

Honestly, I don't give a flying **** about the Taliban... Its not my war.

Nor mine either but that hasn't stopped the State from contributing soldiers to it out of my tax money. So even though I don't like it, it has become my war and I'm helping to fund it.

def

You should make use of the quote system though. Very useful to avoid confusion.

cool

Everyone I know who has smoked for an substantial amount of time has reached a point where it becomes more annoying to smoke than not smoke.

it all comes down to different strokes for diffrent folks ,theres no 100% accrate statistics for usage rate or how much users consume,how much it costs /wat they pay ,or how regularly they pay for it , you have to guess using what information you have

If the demand was there then the price of current amounts of cannabis would be much higher. While there is a decent amount of supply into Ireland of quality smoke, it would never be enough to satisfy a serious demand by people. hence its logical to assume, that the current demand matches the supply. Otherwise there would be a lot more drug dealers setting up shop in the country with major price hikes on the supply.

in a free and completely unregulated market as it is under prohibition ,compitition keeps lowthe price but the fact it passes through so many hands keeps it high and stable ,, and from the information i take from personal experience is an extrodinary amount of dealers for cannabis ,and in case you havent noticed lots of gangs from asia and eastern europe are coming here and growing it thus avoiding the risks of importing ,and reducing the price for quality herbal cannabis

I've seen firsthand the affects on friends, and its a shockingly horrible drug. Anyone dealing/supplying it should be shot. That would reduce the supply quite a bit..

if every heroin addict was given very small amounts ,free or for the pennys its really worth ,heroin of the best quality ,,there would be no demand for black market heroin ,getting rid of the problem of children possibily coming into contact with it at all ,and the second some one does become an addict ,its suddenly available at a much cheaper price and with better purity,,in places like china and maylasia they shoot heroin dealers ,and guess what ,they still have lots of heroin dealers

as stated before ,no demand= no supply

Very poetic. And the point of it was?

it would generate public order not cause public dis order ,this disorder caused by prohibition (perhaps another gate way effect?) is easily traced back to kids smoking joints sitting on walls ,being (from there perspective) harrassed by gardai and old people who own the wall /live near by, as a result this leads to a feeling of rejection and persecution from their perceived authority figures ,if you are branded as trouble,useless or abnormal ,you will almost certainly embrace this or atleast it will affect some decisions in life

Quote:
hey second hand smoke isnt the same as reading somethings entrails, in anyway , if wine is part of mass why cant oil be part of a mass ,discrimination based in prejudice,(prejudie -to form an opinion with out considering all if any of the relevent information ,all negitive health reasons for supporting prohibition are invalid unless you factor in the possible methods for reduceing these ,through regulation ..mental illness for example ,seems to be completely due to the lack of labels(with cannabinoid profiles) and a want for qualitiy product( bud with no seeds ,glass etc) and a lack of choice in lower thc higher cbd products ,

fear of persecution ,lack of information in the useing public, few lads standing around shouting in dublin city center ,handing out a4 sheets ,which will also be in headshops , start the snow ball rollin
Huh? (and no I'm not stoned, and I doubt i would understand if I was)

im not stoned either and havent been for a decent few weeks and dont plan on being so for at least a few more ,but with out facial features ,hand motions and so on its a little bit harder for me to explain my personal view and seemingly for others to understand ,how i asess , interpret and put into context the information i consider relevent

-possible medical consequences of someone else smoking cannabis during worship- second hand smoke

not even half as bad as human or animal sacrifice (some people think you can read the future through a pile of intestines on the floor, some people also think prohibition works)

if a preist can use wine in mass ,a different priest should be able to use cannabis in a different mass for different people,

percieved possible negative health problems for instance- transient psychosis (probably mistaken for schizophrenia quite regularly) is the result of a lack of regulation ,
specifically too much thc(is not good) not enough cbd(an anti psychotic is not good) in a strain,

if you only have high thc strains on the market (when breeding plants for high thc it is always at the expence of the cbd% as far as i can tell but more research is needed) ,your asking for trouble,

if there were cafes an so on you could say(like the alcohol %) that the cannabinoid profile for each batch or harvest must provided on the menu /pack what ever ,,with a warning "too much of this will turn you into a paraniod mess", this would let you know whether smoking this perticular stain every day ,all day (as some people do ) is a good idea,

most arguments against cannabis regulation on medical grounds, are useless and their value is null because in a properly regulated market they would be reduced if not avoided completely ,and the risk is taken at the expence of the user ,not wider society

and if you want this to ever happen (regulation) you need to start the snow ball rolling , then it gathers more snow as it rolls ,and by the time it crashes into ..what ever its a force to be at least considard , everyone on this forum could do up a couple of a4 sheets with site refrences and tit bits of info (eg extra ,extra cannabis cures cancer mary harney couldnt care less google all about it,known by the yanks since 1974,not wanted because its too cheap and theres too much prejudice)and go shout about it in the ciy center or where ever ,turning heads changing minds etc it would be good if young ,well spoken ,good lookin women were involved but hey ye gotta deal with what your givin ,which is will power and google more than anyone had in the holland when it was decriminalised there ,or are you all to busy smoking, and bickering

I'm pretty sure the role of the Gardai is to enforce the law, not determine whether its just or not.

they're trained to enforce the law ,yes but in the offical "declaration of values " it sates that they(individually or as a group is not specified ) must seek out ,expose and oppose all ...bad laws , im guessing its mainly to prevent alcohol prohibition ,which they would jump on and put back into whatever hole it crawled out of ,,,either way its there i plan on asking gardai about this but im not in ireland and wont be for a little while more

Seems more to do with others posters points on religion than what i posted. Use the quote system. Its easy.

note takin ,im only been using this for a day or two ,sorry bout that ,well im sure they'll be reading what were saying to each other..and i wasnt sure about this whole posting thing , if we were all sittin around (face to face)this would be a lot quicker ,and more specific a white board would be good aswell

def

oconcuc wrote: »

The free practise of Religion protection in the Constitution has a "subject to public order and morality" clause. That is interpreted as meaning any religious observances which can objectively be seen as undermining parliamentary approved social governance, are inconsistent with public order.

Similarly, if your religious beliefs allowed you to torture animals, this would conflict with objectively reasonable law prohibiting animal cruelty.

The courts are not health experts, and no case has of yet been brought by a legitimate religous group, backing up their claims with valid medical evidence, claiming their Article 44 rights are being impugned by the Misuse of Drugs Acts.

If the courts did, and there is a good chance they would in the right circumstances, find in favor of allowing a religous observance that included cannabis smoke, only those registered in that religion would be exempt from prosecution. Such a move would not deal with any of the real issues around cannabis prohibition.

yea this is what i was thinkin, about sorry about that , klaz

def

heres some links (sorry, but it its "related" as in it could help make regulation happen, thus at least proping up the economy)

http://www.defendingthetruth.com/articles/10447-cannabis-bible.html

In 1980 the Hebrew University in Israel confirmed Benet's identification of Kaneh-Bosm as hemp, and the respected anthropologist Weston La Barre(1980) referred to the Biblical references in an essay on cannabis."


and im not the only one thinking this...

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/smoke-holy-says--cannabis-user-2040554.html

def

def wrote: »

in a free and completely unregulated market as it is under prohibition ,compitition keeps lowthe price but the fact it passes through so many hands keeps it high and stable ,, and from the information i take from personal experience is an extrodinary amount of dealers for cannabis ,and in case you havent noticed lots of gangs from asia and eastern europe are coming here and growing it thus avoiding the risks of importing ,and reducing the price for quality herbal cannabis

The majority of cannabis that comes into this country comes from external sources. i.e. coming in through the ports of southern and south western area's. From my own experience, very little is actually home grown beyond some curiosity from a house party. Probably the reason that Moroccan grass is so popular. (after all it is lovely grass)

if every heroin addict was given very small amounts ,free or for the pennys its really worth ,heroin of the best quality ,,there would be no demand for black market heroin ,getting rid of the problem of children possibily coming into contact with it at all ,and the second some one does become an addict ,its suddenly available at a much cheaper price and with better purity,,in places like china and maylasia they shoot heroin dealers ,and guess what ,they still have lots of heroin dealers

nah... don't see it. I have on the other hand seen firsthand the desperation in the eyes of users who realise the cash in their hand isn't enough to cover them more than a few days. Introducing better quality heroin won't remove the problem. Destroying the supply, the profits of the dealers, and introducing users to alternatives (without the addictive qualities) will.

On a side note, i have lived in China. In an city with a population of 12 million people.. I've also been to Malaysia. Have you been to Asia yourself? If not, I would recommend spending some time there before you start commenting on their setups. I know there was very little drugs in Xi'an, and the practice of zero tolerance towards dealers paid off. Major cities like KL, Beijing, Shanghai are different circumstances.. Nothing is going to prevent drug use there...

it would generate public order not cause public dis order ,this disorder caused by prohibition (perhaps another gate way effect?) is easily traced back to kids smoking joints sitting on walls ,being (from there perspective) harrassed by gardai and old people who own the wall /live near by, as a result this leads to a feeling of rejection and persecution from their perceived authority figures ,if you are branded as trouble,useless or abnormal ,you will almost certainly embrace this or atleast it will affect some decisions in life

Not really. I grew up in Athlone when it was considered to be one of the major sources of drugs in Ireland, and quite honestly tell you that you're introducing a rather large amount of romanticism into this subject.

im not stoned either and havent been for a decent few weeks and dont plan on being so for at least a few more ,but with out facial features ,hand motions and so on its a little bit harder for me to explain my personal view and seemingly for others to understand ,how i asess , interpret and put into context the information i consider relevent

Less of the drama and more of the focus. The point being is that you don't have to be so obscure.

-possible medical consequences of someone else smoking cannabis during worship- second hand smoke

Relevance? I haven't even mentioned it. And anyone that chooses to be in a room with smokers, chooses to participate. I've had enough of the PC crap already with the smoking ban.

not even half as bad as human or animal sacrifice (some people think you can read the future through a pile of intestines on the floor, some people also think prohibition works)

if a preist can use wine in mass ,a different priest should be able to use cannabis in a different mass for different people,

Again,. nothing to do with me. I haven't introduced religion into this thread. You've found the quote function. Use it.

most arguments against cannabis regulation on medical grounds, are useless and their value is null because in a properly regulated market they would be reduced if not avoided completely ,and the risk is taken at the expence of the user ,not wider society

We don't make peanuts illegal and yet thousands of people are allergic to them. Welcome to the world of hypocrisy. :rolleyes:

and if you want this to ever happen (regulation) you need to start the snow ball rolling , then it gathers more snow as it rolls ,and by the time it crashes into ..what ever its a force to be at least considard , everyone on this forum could do up a couple of a4 sheets with site refrences and tit bits of info (eg extra ,extra cannabis cures cancer mary harney couldnt care less google all about it,known by the yanks since 1974,not wanted because its too cheap and theres too much prejudice)and go shout about it in the ciy center or where ever ,turning heads changing minds etc it would be good if young ,well spoken ,good lookin women were involved but hey ye gotta deal with what your givin ,which is will power and google more than anyone had in the holland when it was decriminalised there ,or are you all to busy smoking, and bickering

Actually reading this, it sounded like you had one of those thoughts stoner groups have about a situation, and how to fix it. Well, sorry to break it to you, but I've never known a stoner to implement the marvellous Idea they thought of while stoned...

they're trained to enforce the law ,yes but in the offical "declaration of values " it sates that they(individually or as a group is not specified ) must seek out ,expose and oppose all ...bad laws , im guessing its mainly to prevent alcohol prohibition ,which they would jump on and put back into whatever hole it crawled out of ,,,either way its there i plan on asking gardai about this but im not in ireland and wont be for a little while more

You're guessing? Ok then. Lets just leave it at that then for a while.

note takin ,im only been using this for a day or two ,sorry bout that ,well im sure they'll be reading what were saying to each other..and i wasnt sure about this whole posting thing , if we were all sittin around (face to face)this would be a lot quicker ,and more specific a white board would be good aswell

If we were sitting face to face I would be rolling around on the floor about now in the giggles at how absurd this whole subject is. Be honest, have you ever asked a regular stoner whether they believed that society would accept their habit? I rather doubt it.

The simple fact is nothing will change in this country, and this subject will raise its ugly head again in 4-5 years.

Tilt Gone

Deleted User wrote: »

The majority of cannabis that comes into this country comes from external sources. i.e. coming in through the ports of southern and south western area's. From my own experience, very little is actually home grown beyond some curiosity from a house party. Probably the reason that Moroccan grass is so popular. (after all it is lovely grass)
.

Sorry but I call bull **** on this. More and more homegrown factories are now being set-up. At least once a week you now read of some large scale set-up getting busted. Dealers have finally seen the light and have now realized beacuse of ever increasing sercurity measures and customs also having far more major success, risking the importation of a couple of million euros worth of gear is stupid when you can set up here cheaply enough and cut out delivery costs. One or two guys can tend to a whole factory of plants if they know what they're doing versus the amount of people it actually takes to import large amounts of weed.

It just doesn't make good business sense to risk so much in the delivery method when there is really no need. It's a good thing because the quality of grass as gone up over the last while. Do we really want to go back to the times of getting Hollands ****ty leftover crap and then having the dopes here spray it with all sorts of nasty stuff to pump up the weight.

Tilt Gone

Tilt Gone wrote: »

Sorry but I call bull **** on this. More and more homegrown factories are now being set-up. At least once a week you now read of some large scale set-up getting busted.

Ok, if you're so sure of this, maybe you have some evidence? I haven't seen any mention of large scale production sites of cannabis being found, except perhaps one or two a year. (and they being mostly for individuals or small communities of users)

Individuals have always been growing small quantities for their own use in this country. That's nothing new. But what you're suggesting is rather different.

And lastly, if you're reading every week that some large scale set up being busted, then the risk of setting up production sites in Ireland are much riskier than importing the amounts.

Dealers have finally seen the light and have now realized beacuse of ever increasing sercurity measures and customs also having far more major success, risking the importation of a couple of million euros worth of gear is stupid when you can set up here cheaply enough and cut out delivery costs. One or two guys can tend to a whole factory of plants if they know what they're doing versus the amount of people it actually takes to import large amounts of weed.

Fine, makes good business sense. However, I still believe that by a rather large majority the cannabis that comes into this country comes from other countries.

The times when seizures of cannabis occur by the Gardai, usually they're related to amounts being taken at entrance points or related to tips from imported amounts. I haven't seen to many reports about "farms" being found and the owners being linked to drug dealers.

def

Deleted User wrote: »

The majority of cannabis that comes into this country comes from external sources.

yes but that is changing dealers arnt stupid ,they mightnt have degrees in economics but the know growing here massively cuts costs and risks ,and if they sell at there existing prices even slightly under then they make incredible
profits ,in comparison to what they were making ,

but it requires start up costs and skills they may not have,
I THINK this is just basic cop on

nah... don't see it

then you arnt looking past the words ,on the page ,do a bit of critical thinking and reasearch and risk management, maybe then you'll see this ideas merit

On a side note, i have lived in China. In an city with a population of 12 million people.. I've also been to Malaysia. Have you been to Asia yourself? If not, I would recommend spending some time there before you start commenting on their setups.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2009/12/death_penalty_for_marijuana_in_malaysia.php

"The following countries still legislate or contemplate the death sentence for cannabis offences: Afghanistan, Borneo, Brunai, China, India, Iran, Iraq, Laos, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Vietnam, Yemen"

http://ccguide.org/deathpenalty.php

i wouldnt be able to live with myself if i went to one of these countrys an inserted my money into a system whos justice department you used the taxes i paid to commit horrific acts like that ,,, to put the quantity of pot this guy got done for in perspective ,bob marley says he smoked about a pound a week!thats 500grams double the amount that poor soul got sentenced for,

but hey diffrent people have diffrent opinions , you wana go to these places ,im not going to think any less of you ,please try not to think less of me because i cant morally justify paying for murder directly or in directly ,when ever i can help it

I grew up in Athlone

a think i know why you fail to see my connection , i dont just dream these ideas up then shout ,i try to justify my opinion with other information i have acess to , not just personal observation...

http://www.cso.ie/search/searchResults.htm?cx=007477919376516988184%3Akd8dk_fgnnq&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=drugs+06++07&sa=Search#1105

and i grew up in the no mans land bordering cabra and finglas ,lets make a comparasion between our areas

in west meath and longford (2006,07)
you have
-0.47 per 1000 people aressted for drugs(cannabis every where in the bulk of these)
in north cental dublin its
-3.84 (within a short walk from the house i grew up in) per 1000

thats a massive diffrence ,im sugesting this plus regular negative interactions with gardai is the reason for the following difrences

your area(per 1000 people)
- attempted murder 0.00
-murder threat 0.00
-assault 0.87
-"other " assault 2.52
-harrassment 0.31

my area(per 1000 people)
-attempted murder 0.01
-murder threat 0.10
-assault 2.55
-"other " assault 5.02
-harrassment 0.26 (ive never heard of any one being arrested for harrassment ,except if gardai really hate you and want to try make you an example for giving cheek/banter depends on what role your playing in the situation,which normally back fires and causes more hostility tward perceive authorities, maybe this works out better in athlone ,but i cant say because i havnt spent much time there

thats a huge difference and its not total its frequency

i think this backs up my theroy

quite honestly tell you that you're introducing a rather large amount of romanticism into this subject.

id say personal /on ground observation ,reality not just numbers , and please if you cant prove me wrong or havent tried then its not "honest"

remember when i said...

a little bit harder for me to explain my personal view and seemingly for others to understand ,how i asess , interpret and put into context the information i consider relevent

Less of the drama and more of the focus. The point being is that you don't have to be so obscure.

there is a lot of related facts and factors to take into account , sorry if i get a bit dramatic ,but with cannabis there is a lot of drama ,and for good reason ,when i said the "poetic" bit way back ,i was trying to relate how the cannabis situation is the ROOT problem CAUSEING society to rot/wilt , through creating a certain mentality in the base of it ie,"young violent thugs" who would love to kick the living sh*t out of any and evey gardai for what they feel the gardai represent

if you give a child matches and petrol ,then leave him alone ,,you have no reason to moan when you come home to find him sitting beside a smouldering ruin

Relevance? I haven't even mentioned it.

yea sorry some one else did as in freedom of religion so long as no one/thing is harmed , which is protected by the irish constitution

and heres some back up for that(its a gift from god and probly was the real "calamus")

"What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

"
THC has been found to reduce tumor growth in common lung cancer by 50 percent and to significantly reduce the ability of the cancer to spread, say researchers at Harvard University, who tested the chemical in both lab and mouse studies. The researchers suggest that THC might be used in a targeted fashion to treat lung cancer.[71]"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis#Lung_cancer_and_chronic_obstructive_pulmonary_disease

We don't make peanuts illegal and yet thousands of people are allergic to them.

perfect example of a tool to fight with ,words are far more effective than bullets ,they create no marters

Actually reading this, it sounded like you had one of those thoughts stoner groups have about a situation, and how to fix it. Well, sorry to break it to you, but I've never known a stoner to implement the marvellous Idea they thought of while stoned...

well what it actually is ,is a thought in the mind of a 147 IQ point scoring brain (not that IQ is any measure of intellegence more commen knowledge)who apparently has incredibly good problem solving skills , turning their attention to a problem and coming up with a method of acheiving regulation ,over the powers that be with there own laws and my "rights", its not the only option ,just the most obvious

Well, sorry to break it to you, but I've never known a stoner to implement the marvellous Idea they thought of while stoned...

yea well i think the word stoner= the word ****** , different letters same meaning , it just degrades a different genre of person , you seem to accept the term without much of a fight ,

i think those new blasphemy laws would help me if i took grannie kenny to court ,for offending my beliefs ,lifestyle and perception of self

You're guessing? Ok then. Lets just leave it at that then for a while.

http://www.garda.ie/angarda/pub/declarationvalues.pdf

nope

If we were sitting face to face I would be rolling around on the floor about now in the giggles at how absurd this whole subject is. Be honest, have you ever asked a regular stoner whether they believed that society would accept their habit? I rather doubt it.

i tell them to believe /demand it ,and then turn self proclaimed ni**ers into matin luther kings

The simple fact is nothing will change in this country, and this subject will raise its ugly head again in 4-5 years.

every thing will change as soon as i get back to the kip i love ,i refuse to see it and the people there abused an raped left, right and centre , a few months an ill start the ball rolling

def

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok, if you're so sure of this, maybe you have some evidence? I haven't seen any mention of large scale production sites of cannabis being found, except perhaps one or two a year. (and they being mostly for individuals or small communities of users)

Individuals have always been growing small quantities for their own use in this country. That's nothing new. But what you're suggesting is rather different.

And lastly, if you're reading every week that some large scale set up being busted, then the risk of setting up production sites in Ireland are much riskier than importing the amounts.



Fine, makes good business sense. However, I still believe that by a rather large majority the cannabis that comes into this country comes from other countries.

The times when seizures of cannabis occur by the Gardai, usually they're related to amounts being taken at entrance points or related to tips from imported amounts. I haven't seen to many reports about "farms" being found and the owners being linked to drug dealers.

christ man , i dont mean to offend but open a new tab go to google a do a bit of reading before ye spew out a load of absolute tripe , statistics can prove or disprove any-thing ,ANYTHING , use your ten digets an brain

the internet is not just for forums and porn:rolleyes:

really ive no problem with you even though youve paid for murder in asia...:eek:

def

that garda declaration of values link seems to be dead for some reason ,,but if you really want it , hit me a PM and ill email it to you ,, if you cant get it your self , i have it on a hard drive

remeber the gardai are just as misinformed as every one else , educate them and regulation will be done in the morning ,with or with out mary harney and cowen and all the other "leaders" ,then they'll realise that prohibition is a form of ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

...leave a nasty stain in their kaks ,rat on each other or switch sides quicker then they can change their dirty knickers

"Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group."

how do you feel now ,knowing the people whom you elected are commiting genocide against your fellow countrymen

-deliberate,check
-systematic destruction ,check
-in whole or in part, check
-ethnic?
-racial?
-religious group ,check
-national group ,(st**ers) check

get them in the dock , just because the STATE does not recognise your religion ,does not give them the right to fine you,send you to a camp, harrass you, insult your beleifs ,brand you stupid ,unhealthy or a bad influence , or degrade you in anyway and to do so is not just immoral it directly and repeatedly breaks international human rights ,and your "rights" layed out in the constitution of the republic of ireland , a supposedly free and democratic society ...

and on top of all that its costing billions ,bare minimum id say 2 billion (including money saved through connected issues) ,

and long term (which the irish arent too good with) it would stop the break down of society ,increasing productivity ,and making the country safer

ireland would be an excellent canidate to lead the rest of the world into a new century ,with commen sense and freedom

but who ever steps up will probly get blown away by drug dealers or anti drug extremists ,maybe even the CIA ,lots of people make lots of money off prohibition ,

def

weedfreedomtinp wrote: »

barley researched ..theres over 100 years of research ...
just that some people to thick to open there eyes

check it out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Brooke_O%27Shaughnessy

some more

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1931247,00.html

def

you obviously havnt been a child for a long time ,

patnjerri

No it shouldn't....junkies

def

kraggy wrote: »

I'd be up for giving the following a chance:

Governement-employed scientists/horticulturists grow it to a strength not surpassing medium-strength weed in Holland

Government shops sell it

Government takes money in sales and taxes, creates employment in shops, and labs, and also in hotels, transport etc when we do have the thousands of people from abroad and the north coming into this jurisdiction to enjoy it.

But I would any seedy, behaviour such as selling drugs on the streets punishable by hefty sentences.

Don't want Dublin/Cork/Galway turning into Amsterdam-type ****holes.

we got a communist over here ,,free (but regulated) market all the way ,any thing else leads to pointless, preventable problems

we need all drugs regulated (well) by one orginisation/council (of doctors, and users) , legal ones and carefully selected illegal ones , taxes from drug use should pay for the damage caused(if any) of their use then whats left goes on to pay for other things, permits are issued

amsterdam is not regulated ,no one checks quality ,cannabinoid profile(maybe thc) ,issues permits etc theres just an age limit,that is not enough for any drug/product

def

MaceFace wrote: »

Are ya all mad?

Legalising weed? Have any of you being to Amsterdam? It is full of an unholy amount of European trash.
It is the only place in the world I have been where I heard open advertising for "Cocaine, Heroine, Ecstacy". Guys shouting it on the corners.
Do you think the criminals will fade away - no - they will just move on to something else (like the harder drugs).

And, who has ever gone to prison for canabis offenses?

in 2006 7015 people
in 2007 9126 people

arrested for posessing cannabis in some form , accepted as personal use please not these are all due to pure bad luck the gardai dont really target users

def

def wrote: »

christ man , i dont mean to offend but open a new tab go to google a do a bit of reading before ye spew out a load of absolute tripe , statistics can prove or disprove any-thing ,ANYTHING , use your ten digets an brain

the internet is not just for forums and porn:rolleyes:

really ive no problem with you even though youve paid for murder in asia...:eek:

Somehow I do think you mean to offend since your whole post is skewed that way. Not going to bother continuing this discussion here.

However I would like you to explain your comment about murder in Asia. PM me. Seriously.

MaceFace

This thread has been going on for ages and I am yet to see a sensible reason for legalising/decriminalising cannabis.

It will not make a blind bit of difference to the government tax take. Any potential money made will be eaten up by the policing of it.
It will make cannabis more accessible and thereby increasing the number of people using.

Remember that this is a drug, and it is not harmless like many people here like us to think it is.

Is there anyone here who thinks the laws should be relaxed and is not a user?

droidus

Well I don't drink but I think alcohol should be banned, hows that?

Gurgle

MaceFace wrote: »

I am yet to see a sensible reason for legalising/decriminalising cannabis.

The trick is to read the words in the boxes. Theres several good reasons listed, along with a few silly ones.

BluePlanet

MaceFace wrote: »

This thread has been going on for ages and I am yet to see a sensible reason for legalising/decriminalising cannabis.

It will not make a blind bit of difference to the government tax take. Any potential money made will be eaten up by the policing of it.
It will make cannabis more accessible and thereby increasing the number of people using.

Remember that this is a drug, and it is not harmless like many people here like us to think it is.

Is there anyone here who thinks the laws should be relaxed and is not a user?

The only way you could come to that conclusion is because you've been wearing earplugs throughtout your entire time here.
I am a (former) user and would like to see it legalised.
Count my wife in too (although she has never been a user).

MaceFace

BluePlanet wrote: »

The only way you could come to that conclusion is because you've been wearing earplugs throughtout your entire time here.
I am a (former) user and would like to see it legalised.
Count my wife in too (although she has never been a user).

What I have heard is a lot of ramblings saying the same thing and not one of the reasons for justification being sensible.

To summarise what I have heard, we should decriminalise because:

• it is not as dangerous as other legal drugs (two wrongs and all that)
• or... it is not harmful (would you allow 12 year olds to smoke it?)
• it can be cost positive (once you actually think about it, you realise it won't be).
• Decriminalising will divert resources to other crimes (so we give up because we don't have resources to police a crime - why not do it for other crimes)
• the current system doesn't work (so fix the system rather than giving up)

What about drug driving?

droidus

it is not as dangerous as other legal drugs (two wrongs and all that)

It is nowhere near as dangerous as the two main legal drugs. In fact illegal drugs in total account for less than 1% of all global drug deaths.

or... it is not harmful (would you allow 12 year olds to smoke it?)

I don't believe that it is entirely harmless and the general opinion here seems to be the same. Relatively speaking it is far less dangerous than common non-prescription drugs like cough medicines and paracetamol though.

The WHO came out and a few years ago and said that 'moderate use amongst adults is relatively harmless'...

it can be cost positive (once you actually think about it, you realise it won't be).

Nonsense. The trade it self is worth hundreds of millions a year. Enforcement and court/prison costs are extremely high. Combine the savings in enforcement costs with the tax from sales and the state is almost guaranteed to make money out of it. If you factor in commercial hemp production you'll be talking serious revenue for both the taxman and private industry.

Decriminalising will divert resources to other crimes (so we give up because we don't have resources to police a crime - why not do it for other crimes)

We give up because the stated aim is to reduce the numbers taking drugs - this approach has failed.

the current system doesn't work (so fix the system rather than giving up)

Yes, - fix the system through legalization.

Some other reasons to legalise:

• Take a huge source of profit out of the hands of criminals.
• No more 'gateway drug' type phenomena as smokers wont have to go to drug dealers for supply.
• Ensure the quality of the drug and decrease the chances of users smoking adulterated substances which could cause severe health problems.
• No more ruining peoples lives through a criminal record/prison for smoking a relatively benign substance.
• Less people drinking = less violence and social disruption. Less murder, less rape, less assault - offenses which are all heavily linked to alcohol consumption.
• Reduce the hypocrisy inherent in all state sponsored anti-drug campaigns and allow us to have have credible drug education policy.

The only basis for legislation on drug use is on the basis of health. Drugs should be a health issue, not a policing issue. Control the most dangerous drugs, legalise the least dangerous, educate people properly (no more 'just say no' rubbish) and treat users and addicts as patients rather than criminals.

What about drug driving?

What about it? Roadside testing is being introduced regardless.

oconcuc

MaceFace wrote: »

What I have heard is a lot of ramblings saying the same thing and not one of the reasons for justification being sensible.

To summarise what I have heard, we should decriminalise because:

• it is not as dangerous as other legal drugs (two wrongs and all that)
• or... it is not harmful (would you allow 12 year olds to smoke it?)
• it can be cost positive (once you actually think about it, you realise it won't be).
• Decriminalising will divert resources to other crimes (so we give up because we don't have resources to police a crime - why not do it for other crimes)
• the current system doesn't work (so fix the system rather than giving up)

What about drug driving?

MaceFace, your reasoning is not just similar, but identical, to that of successive regimes in the developed world who have failed to grasp the fundamental concepts and ideology of Criminal Law.

Obviously, you have never asked the question, what is the law? Why are certain activities regulated, and other criminalised?

Because you have failed to examine this concern, you will not be able to grasp a lot of the discussion that is taking place here.

I appreciate you may have been playing devil's advocate during much of this lengthy debate (and absolutely, at times certain pointless and absurd arguments have been made), but it is you who have failed, as this government has, to give a valid justification for the continuing criminalisation of cannabis.

Moral authority for the criminal law is essential, and we can see by the consistent enormous numbers who continue to use, and also a majority of the population who believe it not deserving of its criminal status, there is no moral authority for cannabis criminalisation.

You bring up the ridiculous points of giving to 12 year olds and drug driving. Regulation is a completely separate matter, and those, I should point out, as you clearly do not understand the difference, are REGULATORY issues.

Fix the system? You cannot fix a system that is fundamentally flawed. If the people, where the law derives its ultimate authority (Article 6, Constitution of Ireland), deem it unnecessary for the state to be so punitive in its approach (which it is clear from the multitude of recent plebiscites, they do), there is no moral authority for the law.

But people like you are happy to waste state resources and actively demonise large swathes of the population. You have not contributed a single, valid rebuttal of the substantive anti-prohibition arguments on this thread, other than your honest opinion. Instead you have focused on the more incoherent and deluded arguments. Some of us have provided you with the information, which you have decided not to engage with. Perhaps you should find another discussion, as you are not providing any rational balance to this discussion.

MaceFace

I take exception to many many of the points here regarding that those who do not want cannabis legalised just "don't get it" and that I am not providing input into this discussion. Actually read the thread and you will plainly see that I challenge many of the reasons of why legalising is not the way forward.
It seems certain people want this to be some sort of love in where everyone smokes a joint, gets on and says "down with the man".
Just because someone doesn't go with your opinion doesn't mean they are not allowed to voice it.

I have continously asked why it should be legalised and the same baseless reasons come up.
I don't want to write a large post for fear of boring everyone to bits, but lets take a couple of examples of the reasons people think it should be legalised and how wrong those arguments are.

(lets limit the discussion to legalise as this is what the thread is called)

- Just because it is not as dangerous as something legal should not mean everything less dangerous should also be legal. Remember that if alcohol or tobacco were invented today, they would most likely also be legal. If it is relatively harmless or totally harmless, then maybe think about it. I assume if it is as safe as you make out, you don't have a problem if your 12 year old daughter, sister starts using it?

- It is not cost positive. Okay, lets think about it. I done some quick calculations and if the government imposed a euro on every joint, that would give them about 100 million a year. They would also save money from freeing up courts of prosecutions of possesion or dealing etc. Money would be generated from the growth and sale of cannabis. The direct costs would be to police this activity and dealing with the health implications of prolonged use which will become a factor for a number of people. Also, what about increased accidents among users. A single road accident costs the state €1m.
Any money made from legalsing will be swallowed up by policing and dealing with the fallout.
Add to this that the product will have to remain competitive with the black market, so revenue may not be as high as you think.
I have also called for on the spot fines instead of clogging up the system. The only people going into the system are dealers and above - and these people will always be criminals even if cannabis is legalised.

Now, the simple reasons I think it should remain illegal (and if you read my posts in the past oconcuc you would see this)

1. Cannabis is a drug, and is harmful if used over a long time, or used inappropriately.
2. It is not legal anywhere else in the world, so if we take the first step, we risk becoming the piriah of the world and inwards investment into this country could decrease drastically.
3. Legalising allows people to use it on the street - I don't want to be waiting at a bus stop inhaling someone elses fumes or stinking of grass when I get home.
4. If it does become legal, it will be much more readily available, and there will be a huge number of kids using.
5. If it is legalised, a large number of people would be attracted here and would contribute little to society. These people who want to live on the edge of society and not work but live like hippies. We will also have many drug tourists coming here for the weed, and that itself will bring more hardcore criminals who will tap into the new market of tourists.


So, rather than the argument that policing it isn't working, therefore just stop policing it, how about we change the way we police it.
Of course you won't agree with that, because regardless of what points are made, unless it means easier access and use, you just won't care.

whynotwhycanti

what an overly long and pointless post based on your own opinion of why you do not think it should be legalised.

Firstly your calculations of the cost benefit kinda disagree with the legislators in california who believe they can make, net profit, 4 billion annually from the legalisation of this drug. I know Ireland could not make 4 billion from it, obvioulsy, smaller state, less people, but a hundred million, not including possible direct increase in tourism. Your calculations are wrong and therefore pointless in this debate as they have been pulled out of thin air.

I wouldn't give my 12 year old niece alcohol, why would i give her cannabis. What a ridiculous point. Nobody says it is harmless, its a drug, of course it is not harmless but we live in a society where alcohol is readily available and socially accepted. It is a legal and huge profit making drug. I think peoples point is why do i have to risk the possibility of a criminal record for taking a drug i like, while people can go out and get rat arsed, puke on streets and start fights from taking a legal drug and they don't have to experience this same risk. That is why people want it legal, so they don't have to possible get a criminal record for taking a drug that has been shown in hundreds of studies to not be as bad as alcohol. If you don't believe me just have a look at some of the graphs from Professor Nutts report, somebody who has spent a good few decades studying the affetcs of all drugs, alcohol included. He established that if alcohol were made illegal today and judged against the same criteria as illegal drugs, it would be a class A drug.

Did i not read a few posts previous some other poster eventually and reluctantly admitting that alcohol is a drug. If that poster needs convincing that alcohol is a drug he shouldn't be posting on this topic as he obviously doesn't have the metal capacity or is just plain ignorant.

Problem is you don't want it legal, you who perhaps partakes in drinking alcohol and does not smoke cannabis is pleased that your drug of choice is legal and readily available but if cannabis smokers want the same rights to take their drugs just as you do, well then no, you have your own personal reasons for not wanting it. Give me some hard facts as to why you don’t' want it legal. If you are so against cannabis being made legal, why don't you start advocating alcohol to become illegal. Why stop with being so passionate about cannabis being illegal, why not get to the root source of the problem with drugs in this country and address the huge problem with alcohol abuse in this country.

Gurgle

MaceFace wrote: »

1. Cannabis is a drug, and is harmful if used over a long time, or used inappropriately.
2. It is not legal anywhere else in the world, so if we take the first step, we risk becoming the piriah of the world and inwards investment into this country could decrease drastically.
3. Legalising allows people to use it on the street - I don't want to be waiting at a bus stop inhaling someone elses fumes or stinking of grass when I get home.
4. If it does become legal, it will be much more readily available, and there will be a huge number of kids using.
5. If it is legalised, a large number of people would be attracted here and would contribute little to society. These people who want to live on the edge of society and not work but live like hippies. We will also have many drug tourists coming here for the weed, and that itself will bring more hardcore criminals who will tap into the new market of tourists.

If you read through the thread, you would see the answers to your points:
1. Yes, we know. Not a legitimate reason for banning it.
2. Not true
3. Not true
4. Not true
5. Not likely

oconcuc

MaceFace wrote: »

I take exception to many many of the points here regarding that those who do not want cannabis legalised just "don't get it" and that I am not providing input into this discussion. Actually read the thread and you will plainly see that I challenge many of the reasons of why legalising is not the way forward.
It seems certain people want this to be some sort of love in where everyone smokes a joint, gets on and says "down with the man".
Just because someone doesn't go with your opinion doesn't mean they are not allowed to voice it.

I have already stated, MaceFace, that I am happy to engage in an energetic debate with any person's reasoned, rational and diverging opinion.

I have been equally critical of those making irrational and unsubstantiated claims on the pro-legalisation side of the discussion.

I am not a cannabis user, I am a sociological and legal researcher, I deal with the facts.

MaceFace wrote: »

I have continously asked why it should be legalised and the same baseless reasons come up.

I have provided you with peer-reviewed research that has been published in the most respected medical, sociological and legal journals in the west. You have only responded to the posts I have made criticising you directly, not the posts referencing the research and evidence.

MaceFace wrote: »

I don't want to write a large post for fear of boring everyone to bits, but lets take a couple of examples of the reasons people think it should be legalised and how wrong those arguments are.

(lets limit the discussion to legalise as this is what the thread is called)

- Just because it is not as dangerous as something legal should not mean everything less dangerous should also be legal. Remember that if alcohol or tobacco were invented today, they would most likely also be legal. If it is relatively harmless or totally harmless, then maybe think about it. I assume if it is as safe as you make out, you don't have a problem if your 12 year old daughter, sister starts using it?

I have never claimed cannabis is harmless.

Cannabis was not invented today, or yesterday, cannabis has been cultivated and used as a stimulant/relaxant in Europe since the 16th century, about the time tobacco was gaining favor with wealthy elites in Europe.

I have never heard one valid argument from any organisation supporting legalisation that has claimed giving cannabis to children as responsible use, and just to let you know, children all over the world have access to cannabis under prohibition.

MaceFace wrote: »

- It is not cost positive. Okay, lets think about it. I done some quick calculations and if the government imposed a euro on every joint, that would give them about 100 million a year. They would also save money from freeing up courts of prosecutions of possesion or dealing etc. Money would be generated from the growth and sale of cannabis. The direct costs would be to police this activity and dealing with the health implications of prolonged use which will become a factor for a number of people. Also, what about increased accidents among users. A single road accident costs the state €1m.
Any money made from legalsing will be swallowed up by policing and dealing with the fallout.
Add to this that the product will have to remain competitive with the black market, so revenue may not be as high as you think.
I have also called for on the spot fines instead of clogging up the system. The only people going into the system are dealers and above - and these people will always be criminals even if cannabis is legalised.

Please, provide us with some evidential support with your dazzling acturial skills. I have outlined a rough indication on the savings for the Criminal Justice system in earlier posts, using comparative data from similar jurisdictions.

MaceFace wrote: »

Now, the simple reasons I think it should remain illegal (and if you read my posts in the past oconcuc you would see this)

1. Cannabis is a drug, and is harmful if used over a long time, or used inappropriately.

Cannabis is a harmful drug, but it is not the duty of the Criminal Law to prohibit responsible adults from engaging in an activity that is moderately harmful (and that is all the evidence can deduce after 40 years of trying). The Criminal Law is there to protect other individuals, society at large and the state from destructive behaviour.

If you had read, or thought about any of my earlier posts, you would see a comprehensive outline of the philosophical model for Criminal Law utilised in this jurisdiction. See John Locke, HLA Hart and Robert Nozick. The works of these philosophers along with Thomas Aquinas and John Finnis have been referred to extensively by the Irish Courts on questions of Criminal Law validity under the Constitutional framework. There is no conflict between this philosophy and cannabis legalisation, see Dr. Timothy Murphy UCC Law.

MaceFace wrote: »

2. It is not legal anywhere else in the world, so if we take the first step, we risk becoming the piriah of the world and inwards investment into this country could decrease drastically.

Baseless and unqualified assertion. Although I am sure you are confident of your skills in international diplomacy, if you look at the de facto legal status of cannabis in the Netherlands, I haven't heard of the Dutch being excluded economically.

I have also provided an extensive outline of the legal implications of cannabis legalisation on international agreements subscribed to by the Irish State.

MaceFace wrote: »

3. Legalising allows people to use it on the street - I don't want to be waiting at a bus stop inhaling someone elses fumes or stinking of grass when I get home.

Don't know where you got this one from? Can we drink on the Street?

MaceFace wrote: »

4. If it does become legal, it will be much more readily available, and there will be a huge number of kids using.

??? Again, children can use it now. Experiences in the Netherlands where it can be purchased in every significant town show otherwise, cannabis use there among under 18 is lower than here. Try the "won't somebody please think of the children" line with Grainne Kenny.

MaceFace wrote: »

5. If it is legalised, a large number of people would be attracted here and would contribute little to society. These people who want to live on the edge of society and not work but live like hippies. We will also have many drug tourists coming here for the weed, and that itself will bring more hardcore criminals who will tap into the new market of tourists.

If you don't want that type of tourist, maybe you should prohibit stag parties coming to dublin for the weekend.

Your claims here are, like all your other claims, unqualified and completely subjective.

MaceFace wrote: »

So, rather than the argument that policing it isn't working, therefore just stop policing it, how about we change the way we police it..

Would you like to suggest how to change it? There has not been one successful change in the policing of prohibition.

People are not stupid, they can read the research, they know the low risk of danger cannabis use poses. This is why cannabis use has continued in spite of the Criminalisation. As long as these people want cannabis, the market will provide them with it.

As long as governments treat it as a Criminal problem, there will be a Criminal issue with cannabis.

MaceFace wrote: »

Of course you won't agree with that, because regardless of what points are made, unless it means easier access and use, you just won't care.

You have not made one argument of substance. Go and read some of the research. Go and read about the law. You don't seem to understand why Criminal Law exists.

MaceFace

whynotwhycanti wrote: »

what an overly long and pointless post based on your own opinion of why you do not think it should be legalised.

Firstly your calculations of the cost benefit kinda disagree with the legislators in california who believe they can make, net profit, 4 billion annually from the legalisation of this drug. I know Ireland could not make 4 billion from it, obvioulsy, smaller state, less people, but a hundred million, not including possible direct increase in tourism. Your calculations are wrong and therefore pointless in this debate as they have been pulled out of thin air.

I wouldn't give my 12 year old niece alcohol, why would i give her cannabis. What a ridiculous point. Nobody says it is harmless, its a drug, of course it is not harmless but we live in a society where alcohol is readily available and socially accepted. It is a legal and huge profit making drug. I think peoples point is why do i have to risk the possibility of a criminal record for taking a drug i like, while people can go out and get rat arsed, puke on streets and start fights from taking a legal drug and they don't have to experience this same risk. That is why people want it legal, so they don't have to possible get a criminal record for taking a drug that has been shown in hundreds of studies to not be as bad as alcohol. If you don't believe me just have a look at some of the graphs from Professor Nutts report, somebody who has spent a good few decades studying the affetcs of all drugs, alcohol included. He established that if alcohol were made illegal today and judged against the same criteria as illegal drugs, it would be a class A drug.

Did i not read a few posts previous some other poster eventually and reluctantly admitting that alcohol is a drug. If that poster needs convincing that alcohol is a drug he shouldn't be posting on this topic as he obviously doesn't have the metal capacity or is just plain ignorant.

Problem is you don't want it legal, you who perhaps partakes in drinking alcohol and does not smoke cannabis is pleased that your drug of choice is legal and readily available but if cannabis smokers want the same rights to take their drugs just as you do, well then no, you have your own personal reasons for not wanting it. Give me some hard facts as to why you don’t' want it legal. If you are so against cannabis being made legal, why don't you start advocating alcohol to become illegal. Why stop with being so passionate about cannabis being illegal, why not get to the root source of the problem with drugs in this country and address the huge problem with alcohol abuse in this country.

Almost everything here is based on opinion, unless of course there are some people here who have documented evidence on legalising cannabis in Ireland?

Now, truth be told, I don't see a reason of why it should be legal. I am listening to all the arguments but they are all around a small number of reasons, none of which stand up.

Regardless of whether alcohol or tobacco should be legal or not, it is nothing to do with cannabis. I am sick of making this point - two wrongs don't make a right.
Using this as a reason, then most drugs should be legal.
The big difference between the two are one is legal and one is not. If people want to avoid a criminal record, there is a very simple solution - don't use it.