Is it morally wrong to buy weed?

Mike 1972

Cianos wrote: »

but the ease of brushing off the moral implications by saying it's no worse than buying a mobile phone or a laptop is a bit of a cheap cop-out.

Try reading up on the Current civil war in the Congo and the role of conflict minerals in funding it. 5 million dead so far (If the victims had lighter skin it would be compared to the holocaust) child soldiers, forced labour/slavery, torture, mutilation and mass rapes. Irelands drug barons and gangland bosses look positively civilised in comparison.

gladi8r

most of the gangland murders are related to territory are they not? so are we not giving these gangsters a reason to kill each other by buying weed? because we are what they are all killing each other over

p.s how do i put a poll into this thread?

Shulgin

liquoriceall wrote: »

Yes your body you can put what you like in it but whos going to pay for the hospitals you will need when you develop chronic respiratory problems? Or a paranoia?

1. Vape the weed. No smoke involved, no damage to lungs.
or
2. Eat the weed. No smoke involved, no damage to lungs.
and
3. Most of the paranoia with weed is because of it's illegal status. Change that and a lot of the paranoia might go up in smoke.

RichieC

Shulgin wrote: »

3. Most of the paranoia with weed is because of it's illegal status. Change that and a lot of the paranoia might go up in smoke.

Indica strains can be pretty bad for the fear.

SprayonCrayons

gladi8r wrote: »

most of the gangland murders are related to territory are they not? so are we not giving these gangsters a reason to kill each other by buying weed? because we are what they are all killing each other over

The prohibition of alcohol in Chicago caused a similar situation if I recall, the birth of organised crime, Al Capone and all that.

How did they solve that problem hmm..? By taxing and regulating it. If it were legal to buy over the counter (with regulations attached to it obviously) it would no longer be in the hands of the gangsters you claim we are forcing to somehow kill each other.

Mike 1972

SprayonCrayons wrote: »

How many gangs in Holland are selling weed? Zero

Not counting the export sector ?

Cianos

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Try reading up on the Current civil war in the Congo and the role of conflict minerals in funding it. 5 million dead so far (If the victims had lighter skin it would be compared to the holocaust) child soldiers, forced labour/slavery and mass rapes. Irelands drug barons and gangland bosses look positively civilised in comparison.

I'm not saying any suffering caused in the processes of production of legally available goods is any less significant, I'm simply saying that with a product and process around which everything is totally illegal, there is no way to improve the conditions for those suffering other than direct intervention (the vast majority of which is at the very end of the supply chain), as opposed to legal goods where there's at least the potential for awareness to be raised, action taken, pressure applied, and conditions eventually improved.

Auvers

SprayonCrayons wrote: »

How many gangs in Holland are selling weed? Zero

hhhmmm you should do a bit of research on that one, its not just harmless hippies, its well known that the Hells Angels control most of the weed and prostitutes in Amsterdam

charlemont

Badgermonkey wrote: »

You're certainly complicit in some of the associated misery, more pronounced in the production, consumption and distribution of coke & heroin.

Nothing morally wrong with growing your own.

Yet our justice system takes a much harder approach to people coming before the courts for cultivation, Its crazy.

Still smoke soapy myself as price of weed is a joke but one of mates is growing some nice stuff, So we'll have to see how it turns out.

SprayonCrayons

Auvers wrote: »

hhhmmm you should do a bit of research on that one, its not just harmless hippies, its well known that the Hells Angels control most of the weed and prostitutes in Amsterdam

Point taken, I'll accept when I'm wrong. oopsie

Mike 1972

Cianos wrote: »

I'm simply saying that with a product and process around which everything is totally illegal, there is no way to improve the conditions for those suffering.

I already suggested three ways.

Actually a fourth would be to abstain while in Ireland but make regular trips to Amsterdam although its probably going to work out rather expensive and opens a host of other other ethical concerns:
1) Carbon footprint
2) Funding oil companies and the wars fought on their behalf
3) Lining Michael O Leary's pockets.

Cianos wrote: »

as opposed to legal goods where there's at least the potential for awareness to be raised, action taken, pressure applied, and conditions eventually improved.

The issues surrounding cannabis could largely be addressed through legalisation which quite frankly is going to happen far sooner than any of the reforms you are suggesting.

Cianos

Mike 1972 wrote: »

I already suggested three ways.

Actually a fourth would be to abstain while in Ireland but make regular trips to Amsterdam although its probably going to work out rather expensive and opens a host of other other ethical concerns:
1) Carbon footprint
2) Funding oil companies and the wars fought on their behalf
3) Lining Michael O Leary's pockets.


The issues surrounding cannabis could largely be addressed through legalisation which quite frankly is going to happen far sooner than any of the reforms you are suggesting.

Sorry I should have explained myself better - I agree with you when it comes to weed, as almost anyone can grow it themselves or at least find someone to buy off who does. That I have no problem with whatsoever. Other drugs though are a completely different story.

Shulgin

RichieC wrote: »

Indica strains can be pretty bad for the fear.

It should be the other way round really. Sativa strains have more THC and less CBD than indica strains. CBC seems to help with the anxiety caused by thc in some users.

http://www.differencebetween.net/science/difference-between-indica-and-sativa/

In the chemical properties, indica has got higher levels of Cannabidiol (CBD) which has got higher sedative effects than dranabinol (THC) so indica will most likely get you sleepier compared to sativa. However because sativa has got higher concentration of THC levels than CBD, it has got more psychoactive effects and therefore it will likely cause pronounced effects on the nervous system like mood changes, perception and general behavior. Although it has more sedative properties, sativa is also said to cause alertness and hallucinatory effects.

Johro

starbelgrade wrote: »

Morals, schmorals.

Starbelgrade schmst...ah fuck it.

mikom

liquoriceall wrote: »

whos going to pay for the hospitals you will need when you develop chronic respiratory problems?
Or a paranoia?

Just the one?

JohnMarston

To be honest, there's worse things you could be buying instead of weed.

Shulgin

JohnMarston wrote: »

To be honest, there's worse things you could be buying instead of weed.

The worst thing of all is buying into the propaganda.

hatrickpatrick

liquoriceall wrote: »

Yes your body you can put what you like in it but whos going to pay for the hospitals you will need when you develop chronic respiratory problems? Or a paranoia?

Valid argument, but it's all or nothing I'm afraid - as in we either treat all self inflicted ailments or none.

So if we're banning things because they cost the health service money, why are there Mcdonald's in almost every town? Why are there SEVERAL off licenses and pubs in every town? Should we have a nationally legalized weight limit and jail anyone who buys a hamburger after passing it?

I don't see why there should be double standards. We either ban all harmful habits or none, and we either refuse to treat all such health problems or none. So I'm fine with refusing treatment for such respiratory problems provided we also refuse treatment for regular smokers who develop the same, and for alcoholics, and for the obese, etc.

Take your pick... I don't accept that we can be nannied about one issue but not another. Policy should be consistent.

Pepe LeFrits

It's morally wrong to deny someone the right to choose what they put into their own body. Foolish too, considering it also gives a whole industry over to criminals.

patneve2

It is morally wrong to buy weed. The price of it is soooo inflated its a disgrace. Cheap weed or grow your own=win but buy a tiny 3g for 50 quid no way.

Shulgin

Spotted this today.


Why Conservatives Should Support Ending Marijuana Prohibition



http://blog.montananorml.org/2010/12/09/why-conservatives-should-support-ending-marijuana-prohibition/

Ron Paul: “The drug war encourages violence. Government violence against nonviolent users is notorious and has led to the unnecessary prison overpopulation. Innocent taxpayers are forced to pay for all this so-called justice.”


Glenn Beck: “You know what, I think it’s about time we legalize marijuana….We have to make a choice in this country. We have to either put people who are smoking marijuana behind bars, or we legalize it. But this little game we’re playing in the middle is not helping us, is not helping Mexico, and is causing massive violence on our southern border.”


William F. Buckley Jr.: “Even if one takes every reefer madness allegation of the prohibitionists at face value, marijuana prohibition has done far more harm to far more people than marijuana ever could.”


Sarah Palin: “I think we need to prioritize our law-enforcement efforts. And if somebody’s gonna smoke a joint in their house and not do anybody else harm, then perhaps there are other things our cops should be looking at to engage in and try to clean up some of the other problems that we have in society.”


Milton Friedman: “There are some general features of a socialist enterprise, whether it’s the post office, schools or the war on drugs. The enterprise is inefficient, expensive, very advantageous to a small group of people and harmful to a lot of people.”

P.S., if you outlaw marijuana, only outlaws will have marijuana. Sound familiar?

AnalogueKid

If they'd only allow people to grow their own (4 or 5 plants per household for example) then the income going into criminals' pockets would be drastically reduced.

Drug dealers don't get rich off people who smoke a couple of spliffs a year, but from those who go through a few ounces a year. A simple and cost-free change in policing, as opposed to all-out legalisation, would profoundly change the cannabis culture in this country. If more cannabis were produced in private homes on a small scale without the fear of arrest, then there would be less available to minors as that in itself is a consequence of a totally unregulated cannabis market.

Over time, if cannabis is viewed as a personal thing and primarily grown by adults by themselves, then filthy soapbar hash and highly dangerous 'grit' weed would become a thing of the past. This would then be far less of a burden on our health service.

Cannabis has been around for 30 million years, and it isn't ever going to go away. Harm reduction should be the aim of the state, not the self-defeating, ludicrous 'war on drugs' which the cowardly politicians so conveniently hide behind.

Prohibition of cannabis is not an anti-drugs policy, it is the greatest gift violent criminal gangs could ever wish for.

this is arse

why would you buy weeds when you can pick them in the garden for free?

ScumLord

Shulgin wrote: »

Sarah Palin: “I think we need to prioritize our law-enforcement efforts. And if somebody’s gonna smoke a joint in their house and not do anybody else harm, then perhaps there are other things our cops should be looking at to engage in and try to clean up some of the other problems that we have in society.”

:eek: Sarah Palin?!! It takes people like her saying things like that to make changes.

It's a problem I have with most pro cannabis media, their preaching to the choir and not to people like Sarah and her followers.

2 stroke

When I lived in Dublin, it always bothered me the number of addicts that robbed to support their habit. Why didn't they just rob their dealers?

Auvers

2 stroke wrote: »

When I lived in Dublin, it always bothered me the number of addicts that robbed to support their habit. Why didn't they just rob their dealers?

wrong thread this is about weed not crack cocaine or meth

Laisurg

Depends on who you get it off really and where the money goes, but sure how are we to know where the money goes, could go into an independent growers pocket or we could buy it off a bloke that seems grand but gets it off some very dodgey gang members, it's the govenments fault anyway since it's illegal and a huge amount of money is going to criminals as a result of them.

Kind of funny the way people sometimes go on about cannabis causing chronic respiratory problems when theres many ways to take cannabis without smoking it, theres also been studys done which indicate that cannabis reduces the risk of lung cancer, to the point where someone who smokes cannabis is less likely to get cancer than someone who has never smoked anything at all (obviously not while mixing cannabis with tobacco though)

Seachmall

AnalogueKid wrote: »

Prohibition of cannabis is not an anti-drugs policy, it is the greatest gift violent criminal gangs could ever wish for.

Only Drug Dealers Want Drugs Illegal.

The point was made earlier that the negative health effects caused by smoking cannabis will cost tax-payers money with regards to health care if it was legalized. But legalizing it will, in theory anyway, reduce the cost to the tax-payer for several reasons:

• The cannabis will obviously be taxed heavily (like alcohol and tobacco).
• The regulation of cannabis will lower the risk of health effects (dangerous materials will be removed and quality will increase, I remember hearing about weed being laced with fiberglass to add weight and give the impression there are more crystals on the bud)
• The usage of cannabis amongst minors (who are at greater risk when it comes to negative health effects) will drop significantly (dealers don't check ID and anyone who has been to secondary school knows it's easier to get weed than drink for this very reason).

Of course the negative health affects with regards to weed are debatable but I'm sure we can all agree that inhaling any burning material will not be good for your health (and weed is most commonly smoked).

DeVore

Dude...um,





Wait... what?

DeV.

DeVore

Does anyone, anyone at all, believe that legalising weed would increase it's usage??


Because to believe that you would have to believe that anyone who wants it is somehow finding it difficult to get at the moment.


Bwahahaha.

DeV.