Why Is Marijuana Illegal?

HavingCrack

Out of interest is there any major political party (we'll say FF, FG, Labour, SF and the Greens for the sake of it) that is in favour or at least de criminalising if not legalising cannabis and has officially said so????

I'll be asking this question to anyone canvassing for votes coming up to the election.

Pace2008

HavingCrack wrote: »

Out of interest is there any major political party (we'll say FF, FG, Labour, SF and the Greens for the sake of it) that is in favour or at least de criminalising if not legalising cannabis and has officially said so????

I'll be asking this question to anyone canvassing for votes coming up to the election.

Sinn Féin, creid e no na creid.

Still doubt they'll be getting my vote.

AntiMatter

Pace2008 wrote: »

Sinn Féin, creid e no na creid.

Still doubt they'll be getting my vote.

Makes a pleasant change from kneecapping dealers.

MagicSean

The main problem I see with legalising it is that it stays in your system for so long. Three months is the average i think. so for three months after having a joint you would not be able to drive as you would be breaking the law.

HavingCrack

Pace2008 wrote: »

Sinn Féin, creid e no na creid.

Still doubt they'll be getting my vote.

Maybe I've gone through their document too quickly but I don't see any references to legalising cannabis in it?

HavingCrack

k_mac wrote: »

The main problem I see with legalising it is that it stays in your system for so long. Three months is the average i think. so for three months after having a joint you would not be able to drive as you would be breaking the law.

I presume you'd have to find some method of defining an acceptable amount as with alcohol. Clearly 2 months after smoking a joint your reactions would be entirely different to 2 hours after smoking it.

Lemsiper

k_mac wrote: »

The main problem I see with legalising it is that it stays in your system for so long. Three months is the average i think. so for three months after having a joint you would not be able to drive as you would be breaking the law.

Three months? Are you daft?

Can you tell me the specific laws governing the use of cannabis while driving, if it were to be legalized?

francie82

cant see it happening in the next 15 years....we are too backward in comparison to other european countries

ordinarywoman

i think i heard Leo Varadkar (fg)talking about legalising in the head shop drama..
Also Ming flannagan...independant..
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/radical-mayor-ming-on-a-roll-and-targeting-dail-2478382.html

dunno about anyone else...

MagicSean

Lemsiper wrote: »

Three months? Are you daft?

Can you tell me the specific laws governing the use of cannabis while driving, if it were to be legalized?

Thats how long it can be detected in your blood. As far as the law is concerned if you are driving dangerously and you have any trace of a drug (prescription or not) you can be prosecuted for driving under the influence. It's not actually as simple as that but thats the best way of explaining it. It's the same legislation as drink driving. Section 49 of the Road Traffic Acts 1968-2006. There is another piece of legislation but I can't locate it at the moment.

SIMPLYTHE

thebigbiffo wrote: »

both these points are ridiculous when taken in the context of what we're talking about here. does the whole country go around drunk every day? is caffeine a gateway drug? it has a stimulatant effect but you wont consider outlawing it on the basis that you move straight to speed or coke when you're not gettting the same buzz off your java in the morning.

drugs (especially MJ) dont destroy peoples lives, the decision they've made destroys their lives. you want to take heroin? welcome to hell sir and there's nobody out there who doesn't know it, you made the choice. salvia and mdma are both harmless aswell. so lets distinguish between meth, crack, heroin and the like and drugs which are - although you'd never want to believe it - in medical terms safe

Hi, I'd just like to point out to you -and others on the site - that MJ has been linked definitively to increased levels of mental illness, particularly schizophrenia. Apparently it can trigger it in people who have an underlying tendency towards it. Schizophrenia levels in Amsterdam and in South East London are off the charts compared to other countries.

I certainly think it does have medical benefits - for cancer, MS patients etc., but IMHO it is foolish to not look at the negative side too.

oh, here's another negative - a lot of my friends who use/used it have NO MEMORY SKILLS and zero motivation!!! while these states are certainly not life-threatening, it does depress them and certainly has held them back in their respective lives...

and please people stop using the "compared to alcohol" debate. obviously, alcohol is harmful to people's health, results in a huge number suffering from addiction etc., but it's legal already, so practically impossible to eliminate now... if alcohol was invented tomorrow, you can bet that there would be huge numbers of people that would oppose it's legalisation...

Lemsiper

k_mac wrote: »

Thats how long it can be detected in your blood. As far as the law is concerned if you are driving dangerously and you have any trace of a drug (prescription or not) you can be prosecuted for driving under the influence. It's not actually as simple as that but thats the best way of explaining it. It's the same legislation as drink driving. Section 49 of the Road Traffic Acts 1968-2006. There is another piece of legislation but I can't locate it at the moment.

Any drug? So if I was found to have traces of acetaminophen in my blood I could be prosecuted? Give over.

You wouldn't get a blood test to determine if your system contained marijuana, I'm pretty sure it would be a urine test. And you probably know that this would not result in a positive sample three months after consumption.

SIMPLYTHE

I_AmThe_Walrus wrote: »

Firstly, I want to express the fact that I am not a regular user of the drug itself, nor am I condoning it - I am just interested how society has labeled it negatively when they are unwilling to educate the ill-informed about the benefits.

1) It is not in any way, shape or form, addictive, mentally or physically.
2) It has unlimited and legitimate medical uses.
3) It is not a "gateway" drug.
4) If it was legal, organised crime would fall.
5) Government can tax it and give tourism a boost.

The funny thing about this whole farce is, Marijuana has been legal in the Netherlands since the 30's and according to the consumption stats, the Dutch use the recreational drug the least. Not one recorded fatality has occurred from the use of marijuana, yet alcohol and tobacco are severe killers and they're still available.

What are you thoughts? Should it be available for purchase, legally?

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

Marijuana / Cannabis and Schizophrenia
Overview: Use of street drugs (including LSD,methamphetamine,marijuana/hash/cannabis) and alcohol have been linked with significantly increased probability of developing psychosis and schizophrenia. This link has been documented in over 30 different scientific studies (studies done mostly in the UK, Australia and Sweden) over the past 20 years. In one example, a study interviewed 50,000 members of the Swedish Army about their drug consumption and followed up with them later in life. Those who were heavy consumers of cannabis at age 18 were over 600% more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia over the next 15 years than those did not take it. (see diagram below). Experts estimate that between 8% and 13% of all schizophrenia cases are linked to marijuna / cannabis use during teen years.

ScumLord

k_mac wrote: »

The main problem I see with legalising it is that it stays in your system for so long. Three months is the average i think. so for three months after having a joint you would not be able to drive as you would be breaking the law.

Wouldn't that be great if it where true. It's not though. They can find one of the chemicals from cannabis in your body for a long period of time but it's not an active ingredient that get's you stoned their finding. It's like saying we found water in your system 4 months after you had a shot of whiskey you must still be under the influence of drink.

MagicSean

Lemsiper wrote: »

Any drug? So if I was found to have traces of acetaminophen in my blood I could be prosecuted? Give over.

You wouldn't get a blood test to determine if your system contained marijuana, I'm pretty sure it would be a urine test. And you probably know that this would not result in a positive sample three months after consumption.

Like i said it's not that simple. The prosecution must also show that the drug was responsable for the bad driving.

ScumLord wrote: »

Wouldn't that be great if it where true. It's not though. They can find one of the chemicals from cannabis in your body for a long period of time but it's not an active ingredient that get's you stoned their finding. It's like saying we found water in your system 4 months after you had a shot of whiskey you must still be under the influence of drink.

I think it was the Air Corps that tested it and found that response times were still not normal three months after using cannabis.

EDIT: Sorry my mistake. Three months is the maximum, not the average, time it can be detected in your blood. It depnds on the quantity, frequency and strength of what you smoked. It also depends on your level of body fat and your metabolism.

Pace2008

HavingCrack wrote: »

Maybe I've gone through their document too quickly but I don't see any references to legalising cannabis in it?

Christ, that's not even the document I remember looking at, was something completely different in mind. Must remember: dreams =/= reality.

And I haven’t had a smoke in over a month…

smokedeels

steve06 wrote: »

And have you seen the state of the people that go there? Temple Bar is bad enough as it is without bringing hash café's into it.

It's "bad enough" because it's full of bars, casinos and strip clubs, while they may look gaunt, pale and red eyed, stoners are not renowned for being as aggressive, insulting and intimidating as the type of people that prowl the aforementioned establishments, so I doubt their addition would bring the tone of the place down much.

mikom

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

Experts estimate that between 8% and 13% of all schizophrenia cases are linked to marijuna / cannabis use during teen years.

So teens should not smoke it...... similar to the way in which teens should not drink alcohol.
Fair enough.

ScumLord

k_mac wrote: »

I think it was the Air Corps that tested it and found that response times were still not normal three months after using cannabis.

EDIT: Sorry my mistake. Three months is the maximum, not the average, time it can be detected in your blood. It depnds on the quantity, frequency and strength of what you smoked. It also depends on your level of body fat and your metabolism.

Is it THC they're talking about or something else though? I'm pretty sure THC doesn't not stay in your system for any exaggerated length of time. In the documentary super high me they did similar tests and response times actually improved*. The US air corps are not a reliable source either way can you link to this test, when was it carried out?

EDIT: *Response time is wrong there, over all his mental agility improved.

MagicSean

ScumLord wrote: »

Is it THC they're talking about or something else though? I'm pretty sure THC doesn't not stay in your system for any exaggerated length of time. In the documentary super high me they did similar tests and response times actually improved*. The US air corps are not a reliable source either way can you link to this test, when was it carried out?

EDIT: *Response time is wrong there, over all his mental agility improved.

I don't have a link to the study. I think it was brought up in a previous marijuana thread so i'll have a look for it.

It's the THC that lingers in your system. It is stored in the fatty tissue and that is how it can hang around.

Lemsiper

k_mac wrote: »

I don't have a link to the study. I think it was brought up in a previous marijuana thread so i'll have a look for it.

It's the THC that lingers in your system. It is stored in the fatty tissue and that is how it can hang around.

And does it still affect the workings of ones brain while it is stored in the fatty tissue?

Lukker-

Lemsiper wrote: »

And does it still affect the workings of ones brain while it is stored in the fatty tissue?

No. It leaves your body quicker the more you excersise too.

Also as you excersise, THC is re-released into your system, so it could give another meaning to a runners high :P

Trog

It's illegal because a large enough chunk of the voters in this country are over 50 and conservative so it is unwise to make a controvertial move like decriminalising it. Especially when your main concern is re-election.

Ruski

DepecheHead101 wrote: »

Not everyone is a caricature, you know. As a drinker I am not a sweaty, obnoxious, wife beating, car stealing lout.

As it happens, plenty of organizations and people are trying to do something about it. In America the movement has become incredibly powerful and credible. Legalization of marijuana is now a mainstream, feasible topic. NORML have adverts on national television. A government run website listed legalization of marijuana as the number one question to offer up to Barrack Obama. You know ... the leader of the free world. Mind you he still dismissed it as if it was the pipe dream of some ragtag group of shamans.

Of course you won't know any of this, because you don't actually know anything about this topic. You're just one of these people, like many in the thread, who has nothing to either gain or loose from pot smokers and legal weed, but sees fit to rain on their parade because you consider it alien and bizarre that someone would choose to smoke grass instead of just 'having a pint like the rest of us normal folk'.
But thanks for you're contribution to the thread :rolleyes:.

I hate to sound so crude about it but can those of you who want to keep Cannabis illegal just ... bugger off already? Legal Cannabis is very, very unlikely to have an impact on any of your lives unless it becomes state law to gas the homes of suburban Ireland with concentrated THC. Any negative effects - outweighed as they are by the positives [and they are outweighed] of legalization can be taken care of with tax euro. Why does it matter to you what I inhale? Can you not just ... piss off ... no?

How many of these same people got a bee in their bonnet when various pub and off liscence restrictions were brought in place?

Christ, at least you can get your drug of choice in a garage.

Nice essay. Unfortunately I was being sarcastic.

Catsmokinpot

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

Hi, I'd just like to point out to you -and others on the site - that MJ has been linked definitively to increased levels of mental illness, particularly schizophrenia. Apparently it can trigger it in people who have an underlying tendency towards it. Schizophrenia levels in Amsterdam and in South East London are off the charts compared to other countries.

It's not about our safety really it isn't, when are people going to realise this, seriously. If a morbidly obese person who will eventually kill themselves walks into a shop they can buy a cupcake without the batting of an eyelid, Because there's a profit in it. They don't give a s**t about the persons health. If they gave a s**t then weight management clinics and quitting aids for cigarette smokers would be free, but they aren't. They would ban boxing matches, but no, we like to see people beating the s**t out of each other. And no, I'm not suggesting we ban cigarettes, cupcakes or boxing matches, I'm trying to get it into your head how ridiculously hypocritical it is to ban cannabis.

Give up on this notion that schizophrenia is a big part of making it illegal because the few studies that say its damaging to health, there are others that say it isn't. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't be cautious, like with any drug, kids shouldn't be able to smoke it until they're old enough to make that decision. There's a list as long as your arm of harmful medical effects of alcohol consumption including dementia and psychosis so don't give us bulls**t arguments that its for our safety.

The chief drug policy advisor in the UK was sacked after he carried out a scientific study that suggested it's far less harmful than alcohol, the man doesn't smoke, he was just a scientist that did a study. Now they've changed the rules to say that a scientist doesn't have to be on the drug policy commission now.

Wake up.

I'm sick of hearing this argument, it's about control and public approval, plus it does the work that some other drugs do, only better and without the side effects; it will do the work that some materials do too, only better. they will not be able to control sale and purchase completely therefore wont be able to get as much revenue. This is why there's no great rush to legalise. its also not legalised because of the indifference of people who don't care if it's legal or not because it doesn't affect them.

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

oh, here's another negative - a lot of my friends who use/used it have NO MEMORY SKILLS and zero motivation!!! while these states are certainly not life-threatening, it does depress them and certainly has held them back in their respective lives...

That's like a fat bastard blaming a burger for making him a fat bastard, fact is, people get depressed without drugs, they are lazy without drugs, the memory problem I'll admit, but its not neither permanent nor serious, the memory problem I'll admit, but its not permanent nor serious :rolleyes:. I smoke, not much any more but I still smoke, never affected my job, had it for 8 years, smoked for far longer, in college now doing a degree, the only thing it affects is my hunger. yet, I'm still a criminal for smoking something that grows in the ground.

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

and please people stop using the "compared to alcohol" debate. obviously, alcohol is harmful to people's health, results in a huge number suffering from addiction etc., but it's legal already, so practically impossible to eliminate now... if alcohol was invented tomorrow, you can bet that there would be huge numbers of people that would oppose it's legalisation...

Why on earth would we stop, its a perfectly reasonable argument that F*****g nails people every time so they just pooh pooh it like it's no big thing, when it's actually one of the biggest reasons. look at prohibition in America, when that started it created a black market, criminals and reams of black market related deaths, just the same as making other drugs illegal.

"Oh but we care about your safety", bulls**t.

And the "Oh Alcohol is legal already" argument, well cannabis was legal up to the 70's in Ireland and the 20's in England, It was made illegal before people started looking for hypocritical scientific reasons to make it illegal. doesn't that say anything to you at all? again don't want alcohol made illegal just want people to realise the hypocrisy of it all.

Oh and and laws can change, all it takes is for the people to wake up.

I don't know how many times this same thread has been started on different forums over the past it always ends the same, with ignorant people who just quote statistics and have neither sense nor reason.

awesom_o

I have numerous friends, who have got caught with big quantities of cannabis with them and they have nearly always been arrested for it. They are taken in, for questioning/give their details and get sent home. They are always told that they will most likely be prosecuted 'in the next few weeks, pending further investigation'. But after this, I can honestly say 80% of them are never prosecuted for whatever reason. They are always given a 'formal warning' but thats it.

To be honest, I think its a waste of money on the part of the justice system. They arrest a lot of people for cannabis related crimes or whatever and never pursue most of the cases unless there is evidence that there is other harder drugs involved.

This process is a complete and utter waste of money.
If cannabis was legalized and taxed, the government would have more funding to put towards beneficial programs.

charlemont

awesom_o wrote: »

I have numerous friends, who have got caught with big quantities of cannabis with them and they have nearly always been arrested for it. They are taken in, for questioning/give their details and get sent home. They are always told that they will most likely be prosecuted 'in the next few weeks, pending further investigation'. But after this, I can honestly say 80% of them are never prosecuted for whatever reason. They are always given a 'formal warning' but thats it.

To be honest, I think its a waste of money on the part of the justice system. They arrest a lot of people for cannabis related crimes or whatever and never pursue most of the cases unless there is evidence that there is other harder drugs involved.

This process is a complete and utter waste of money.
If cannabis was legalized and taxed, the government would have more funding to put towards beneficial programs.

They must doing some ratting to get off.. I've 5 convictions for cannabis possession yet the largest bit I got caught with was a half ounce, the other 4 times were small nodges.. A disgrace to bring me to court for that..

Phony Scott

I'm not reading though all those posts. My position on it is that it should be made legal. I very rarely smoke it myself, but scabbily smoke a jot if it's passed around.

My cousin who is in her sixties is as fit as a fiddle and works as an astronomer (total hippy) and has done for the majority of her professional life. Pot-head she may well be, but she's nobodies fool.

That said, she does seem to have anger management issues, especially when people tell her that cannabis should remain illegal! :pac:

Actually, what brought me here was that I found out that Howard Marks is touring in Ireland. I was kinda hoping he'd be playing in Dublin, but I can't see any information on it? Maybe he's been and gone? Anyone know?

TPD

Phony Scott wrote: »

I'm not reading though all those posts. My position on it is that it should be made legal. I very rarely smoke it myself, but scabbily smoke a jot if it's passed around.

My cousin who is in her sixties is as fit as a fiddle and works as an astronomer (total hippy) and has done for the majority of her professional life. Pot-head she may well be, but she's nobodies fool.

That said, she does seem to have anger management issues, especially when people tell her that cannabis should remain illegal! :pac:

Actually, what brought me here was that I found out that Howard Marks is touring in Ireland. I was kinda hoping he'd be playing in Dublin, but I can't see any information on it? Maybe he's been and gone? Anyone know?

Your cousin sounds class! :P

I think he was in Donegal in late 2009, not sure though. Haven't heard anything recently.

Parsley

TPD wrote: »

Your cousin sounds class! :P

I think he was in Donegal in late 2009, not sure though. Haven't heard anything recently.

he gave a talk in UCC two weeks ago.