Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Legalize Cannabis Ireland
Options
Comments
-
1. Illegal cigarettes are a booming trade. What makes you think cannabis would be any different?
As has been said, cigarettes are over-taxed. That's how the black market works, when something becomes too expensive to sell or distribute legally, you do it illegally.2. You seem to be under the impression that the majority of cannabis dealers are of the ageing hippy variety. This is not correct. The majority of them are dangerous gangsters.
How did my posts conjure up that image? Considering I mentioned young opportunistic males from all backgrounds as the main street level dealer.3. They may be responsable for the perceptions people have but the US has absolutley no input on our cannabis laws.
And how valuable do you think perceptions are? You're arguing on this message board because of your perceptions of drug use!
For the last 80 years they've had all the input they need in policy. They started these laws and we keep them up so we don't end up on America's bad side, economically or otherwise.
And what about money in politics, what's your answer for that? It prevaids every facet of political life and policy making, lobbying decides the stance of every politician in power.
Imagine a wonder drug able to provide much-needed relief from dozens and dozens of conditions. Imagine it’s cheap, easy to grow, easy to dispense, easy to ingest and, over millennia of “product testing,” has produced no fatalities and few side effects—except for the fact that it “reportedly” makes you feel really, really good. That would be quite a drug. Knowing all this, it’s easy to see why the pharmaceutical industry worries about competition from marijuana. Pharma is a massive industry here in Ireland and they're just one of those power players who've got a vested interest in keeping cannabis illegal.4. It wasn't me that brought up people ruining their lives with drugs. I simply responded to another posters comment about it. i would consider a person who has an uncontrolled addiction to have ruined their life and damaged the lives of those around them.
And what would you like to do with these people? Lock them up? In a prison? The place with all the murderers, rapists and violent criminals? It's been said before, but anyone who tanks their life so spectacularly into addiction does not need to end up in prison, they need treatment.
If we're talking about harm and cost to society, jail for illegal(UNTAXED) drug possession takes massive Garda resources, justice system resources and the prison cell where he will cost us E20,000 a year alone. After release he'll be a convicted criminal with nothing but hate for the government who kidnapped him. He wont be not paying taxes, he won't be able to get any job worth having and now he knows exactly how much the government and society actually care about him.5. I'm not against the legalisation of cannabis. Not sure where you got that. I think it would be beneficial financially and medically to the country. What i am against is the false notion put out by the legalise campaign that it would be an easy task and everyone would live happily ever after.
No one is arguing that.6. i agree in part with what you say. But I believe that some substances are so destructive that prohibition is necessary to protect people.
...7. I agree with the prohibition of activities which put a burden on or endanger others. i don't believe that cannabis falls under this category but I do think heroin and cocaine does.
This is the Legalize Cannabis Ireland thread.9. Alcohol has been around for years but foetal alcohol syndrome is a relatively new discovery. Your belief that cannabis won't be linked to more medical conditions in the future is very short sighted.
It's an opinion, not a belief.11. Or kill them. I'm surprised at your claim that the money is there. The country is bankrupt.
The country is, but we're talking about industrialists and investors. They always seem to have money, no matter how well the economy is or isn't doing.12. I'm surprised you can;t see the parallel. People on cannabis have impaired judgement. People on cocaine have increased aggression. These effects can endanger others but you believe that it is up to the user not to let them or to hold them responsable afterwards. How is it different from drink driving? It creates an extra risk but as long as the user doesn't crash then there are no victims. If there are then he can be held responsable afterwards. The two stances are exactly the same so can you tell me why prohibition is correct in one and not the other?
The danger inherent in driving a car compared to driving your body means that they're very different.I'm not opposed to it. I find it pathetic.
Why? What's so wrong with it? What makes ingesting substances so 'pathetic' to you?0 -
No that's not the point. The price of intensively grown weed will be a fraction of the cost of illegally grown weed. However if the government over tax it back to prices above street weed it's obviously not going to have any affect of the black market.So legalising and regulating won't necessarily kill the black market. The government would have to still induce people away from the dealers with tax incentives. So it's like I said. Not a simple process that would bring in a financial windfall.
I've been buying weed off dealers for more than 10 years, all kinds of different dealers from all over the country, how many dealers have you bought off? None? That's what I thought, you should read less daily mail.That is so much bull****. Even if the fellas you deal with are local lads where do you think they get their stuff? From a bigger dealer. They don't buy straight from the importer. This is the kind of stuff you tell yourself to avoid the guilt of how many people die to get you your smoke.
Prohibition has only promoted and encouraged drug use, making drugs cheaper and easily available all over the world. That's an undeniable fact. I'm not waiting for snail pace governments to make changes in a bizarre and obviously terrible laws that's having the complete opposite effect to what it was intended to do.Maybe people should have the right to use drugs. But at the moment they don't. And when you buy drugs from dealers you are funding a lot of violence. You can try and avoid the responsability by saying you have no choice but in fact you do have a choice. You can choose not to do drugs. You can choose do go on your religious pilgrimage where it is not illegal. You can take part in some coherent campaign to legalise it. You could even grow your own if you really believed in your right but didn't want it to come at the cost of lives. But that's too much effort right?
The laws are just bits of paper, the law has to change because the natural world in which humans do drugs won't. You can say the law is the law but to me the law is just words on paper if the words are idiotic and wrong I won't follow them.0 -
That is so much bull****. Even if the fellas you deal with are local lads where do you think they get their stuff? From a bigger dealer. They don't buy straight from the importer. This is the kind of stuff you tell yourself to avoid the guilt of how many people die to get you your smoke.
I know where they get their "stuff" and it ain't from bigger dealers.
No blood involved, except maybe when they accidentally nick themselves with the secateurs.0 -
So legalising and regulating won't necessarily kill the black market. The government would have to still induce people away from the dealers with tax incentives. So it's like I said. Not a simple process that would bring in a financial windfall.
Who said it was simple? this is a country of 5 million people, it'd be as simple as anything else involving 5 million unique individuals.You would be wrong. Here's an example of a recent seizure
http://www.thejournal.ie/drugs-cash-and-firearms-seized-in-rathfarnham-area-of-dublin-501209-Jun2012/
Firearms don't seem to match with your idea of dealers. You probably just think about the dealer who sells to a few friends. Where do you think he gets his stuff? It's from a bigger dealer, who in turn gets it from a bigger dealer. The idea of a stoner hippy growing cannabis and selling it is ridiculous. Most people like that grow enough for personal consumption. It's too risky otherwise.
Large amounts of money outside of taxation attracts criminals, surprise.Actually i think that people who can get a high without having to ingest a poison are quite lucky.
We really need to clamp down on this running craze, people are destroying they're bodies!
The only reason these people can get high is their brain carries around its own drugs that it releases under duress. The person is still 'doing' a drug, they're just not ingesting one.And who would distribute this information? The government? The same government who the legalise campaign have branded liars? Why would people believe them now? It would ake a long time for the real issues behind drug use to be explained to people.
We live in the age of information. The reason people don't trust government propaganda is because people can already call bullsh*t on it. I'm sure we can sort something out.What about people who suffer from mental disabilities but are over 18? Would they fit in your exceptions?
...It's still regulation that is required for a safe product to be out there. And surely you'll still need laws to put the dealers who are dealing cheap stuff off the street.
The same rules that apply to people who try and sell bootleg alcohol.No we don't. You just said further up that the government would have to tax it low so people don't stay with the dealers. So it can't be both ways.
I'm sure the government would do the maths so that they weren't taxing it low or too high.Unless he tries to drive a car, operate heavy machinery, fire a weapon, fly a plane, perform surgery You claim that there is no victim in cannabis use. Well there is no victim in drink driving either. The victim only arises if you crash.
The danger inherent in driving a car compared to driving your body means that they're very different. There'd be laws against all the examples you gave above as well.That is so much bull****. Even if the fellas you deal with are local lads where do you think they get their stuff? From a bigger dealer. They don't buy straight from the importer. This is the kind of stuff you tell yourself to avoid the guilt of how many people die to get you your smoke.
Read Defiler's comment.Maybe people should have the right to use drugs. But at the moment they don't. And when you buy drugs from dealers you are funding a lot of violence. You can try and avoid the responsability by saying you have no choice but in fact you do have a choice. You can choose not to do drugs. You can choose do go on your religious pilgrimage where it is not illegal. You can take part in some coherent campaign to legalise it. You could even grow your own if you really believed in your right but didn't want it to come at the cost of lives. But that's too much effort right?
The blood of African children is on your hands when you buy a computer or a mobile phone. Not to mention the slave hours worked by chinese people assembling those gadgets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan
Your clothes were probably made in a sweatshop by small, overworked hands.
The materials your house is made from were callously taken from where they occurred naturally.
The alcohol you drink competes with domestic abuse and sex abuse for the lead cause of broken homes. If everyone stopped drinking it they'd stop making it.0 -
So legalising and regulating won't necessarily kill the black market. The government would have to still induce people away from the dealers with tax incentives. So it's like I said. Not a simple process that would bring in a financial windfall.
Yes it would if done properly. How big is the alcohol industry? And it wouldn't be about "tax incentives, it would be about not placing 300% taxes on it or whatever the crazy figure with cigarettes is. You also continually ignore that despite the high taxes, the vast majority of cigarettes are still purchased legally.
You would be wrong. Here's an example of a recent seizure
http://www.thejournal.ie/drugs-cash-and-firearms-seized-in-rathfarnham-area-of-dublin-501209-Jun2012/
Firearms don't seem to match with your idea of dealers. You probably just think about the dealer who sells to a few friends. Where do you think he gets his stuff? It's from a bigger dealer, who in turn gets it from a bigger dealer. The idea of a stoner hippy growing cannabis and selling it is ridiculous. Most people like that grow enough for personal consumption. It's too risky otherwise.
Other poster have already dealt with this. It's not the wire here.
Actually i think that people who can get a high without having to ingest a poison are quite lucky.
And I don't give a **** what people do to get their kicks as long as it doesn't harm others.
And who would distribute this information? The government? The same government who the legalise campaign have branded liars? Why would people believe them now? It would ake a long time for the real issues behind drug use to be explained to people.
Government, scientists, teachers, healthcare workers, lobby groups whoever. Same people who educate about alcohol and cigarettes. And no, I'd say a few hour session would suffice to educate people about the pros and cons of cannabis use.
What about people who suffer from mental disabilities but are over 18? Would they fit in your exceptions?
Yes, they probably would.
It's still regulation that is required for a safe product to be out there. And surely you'll still need laws to put the dealers who are dealing cheap stuff off the street.
If it is not taxed crazily, then the dealers will be unable to undercut the legal suppliers. Grams go for as little as a fiver in Amsterdam. When have I ever said I am against regulation of it? But with cannabis it is almost moot point anyway given how safe it is.
No, you are mixing up the issues now. The analogy I used was right for the argument you made. You are trying to justify something by saying it is not as bad as something else which is legal.
FFS, are you still going on with this strawman? People saw cannabis is harmful so it should be banned. My argument is that it is nowhere near as harmful as prohibitionists make out.
No we don't. You just said further up that the government would have to tax it low so people don't stay with the dealers. So it can't be both ways.
Well we don't but you'd just be incorrect. They just wouldn't have to tax it at crazily high levels.
Unless he tries to drive a car, operate heavy machinery, fire a weapon, fly a plane, perform surgery You claim that there is no victim in cannabis use. Well there is no victim in drink driving either. The victim only arises if you crash.
Another strawman. Again, you are missing the risk the driver puts people at. I am not in favour of speeding or shooting guns into crowded spaces with the intention of missing either.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Unbelievable... So I am supposed to respect a group promoting an illegal activity?
This has to be one of the most pig ignorant comments I've seen here in quite a long time.
In Iran it's illegal to be homosexual and punishable by death. Therefore you don't respect human rights of the gay men and women who wish to fulfill their wants?
Just because something is illegal doesn't make it wrong. There are ridiculous laws all over the world. Cannabis being illegal is one of them.
PS: I'm not a smoker.0 -
Defiler Of The Coffin wrote: »Which leads us back to the beginning and the crux of the argument. If cannabis was legalised nobody whatsoever would need to get hurt.
You are likely correct. But cannabis is not legal so purchasing it is voluntarily funding murder. There's no way around that fact.Defiler Of The Coffin wrote: »The responsibility lies with the government and the people who commit the violence. Your pontificating is starting to get tiresome at this stage.
The responsability lies with the person who funds them. That is to drug buyer who gives money to a dealer for a recreational product knowing full well the money is going to criminals. That is a conscious choice. Your denial of responsability is also tiresomeSnake Pliisken wrote: »As has been said, cigarettes are over-taxed. That's how the black market works, when something becomes too expensive to sell or distribute legally, you do it illegally.
DVD's aren't over taxed but the black market trade is still booming. Why do you think cannabis would be different?Snake Pliisken wrote: »How did my posts conjure up that image? Considering I mentioned young opportunistic males from all backgrounds as the main street level dealer.
There are very few people out there who could grow sufficient quantities to deal to more than a few friends. The majority is imported.Snake Pliisken wrote: »And how valuable do you think perceptions are? You're arguing on this message board because of your perceptions of drug use!
For the last 80 years they've had all the input they need in policy. They started these laws and we keep them up so we don't end up on America's bad side, economically or otherwise.
And what about money in politics, what's your answer for that? It prevaids every facet of political life and policy making, lobbying decides the stance of every politician in power.
I would think it more likely that the church has influenced laws in Ireland rather than the US. In fact i think Irelands drug prohibition laws were passed over a decade after the United States. That's not exactly bowing to pressure from them.Snake Pliisken wrote: »Imagine a wonder drug able to provide much-needed relief from dozens and dozens of conditions. Imagine it’s cheap, easy to grow, easy to dispense, easy to ingest and, over millennia of “product testing,” has produced no fatalities and few side effects—except for the fact that it “reportedly” makes you feel really, really good. That would be quite a drug. Knowing all this, it’s easy to see why the pharmaceutical industry worries about competition from marijuana. Pharma is a massive industry here in Ireland and they're just one of those power players who've got a vested interest in keeping cannabis illegal.
Pharmaceutical companies are here because of the low tax rate and intelligent work force. I have never heard of them getting involved in any debate on the legalisation of marijuana in Ireland.Snake Pliisken wrote: »And what would you like to do with these people? Lock them up? In a prison? The place with all the murderers, rapists and violent criminals? It's been said before, but anyone who tanks their life so spectacularly into addiction does not need to end up in prison, they need treatment.
I agree with you there. But in some cases they will not accept treatment and will spiral into destructive behaviour which affects more than themselves.Snake Pliisken wrote: »If we're talking about harm and cost to society, jail for illegal(UNTAXED) drug possession takes massive Garda resources, justice system resources and the prison cell where he will cost us E20,000 a year alone. After release he'll be a convicted criminal with nothing but hate for the government who kidnapped him. He wont be not paying taxes, he won't be able to get any job worth having and now he knows exactly how much the government and society actually care about him.
I don't believe in imprisonment for simple posession but i have no problem seeing a dealer locked up. i disagree with your assertion that simple posession prosecutions take up so much Garda, court or prison resources. You're talking about less than an hour of the Garda time, a few minutes in court and maybe a day in prison.Snake Pliisken wrote: »No one is arguing that.
Yes they areSnake Pliisken wrote: »...
I'm not sure what that means.Snake Pliisken wrote: »This is the Legalize Cannabis Ireland thread.
Yes but it has stretched it's boundaries.Snake Pliisken wrote: »It's an opinion, not a belief.
Glad you agree.Snake Pliisken wrote: »The danger inherent in driving a car compared to driving your body means that they're very different.
Not really. The two are equally affected by intoxication.Snake Pliisken wrote: »Why? What's so wrong with it? What makes ingesting substances so 'pathetic' to you?
i see it as a weakness that is quite unappealing.No that's not the point. The price of intensively grown weed will be a fraction of the cost of illegally grown weed. However if the government over tax it back to prices above street weed it's obviously not going to have any affect of the black market.
Exactly how would leglally grown weed be cheaper than weed that is grown in massive bulk and imported without any tax?I've been buying weed off dealers for more than 10 years, all kinds of different dealers from all over the country, how many dealers have you bought off? None? That's what I thought, you should read less daily mail.
And I'm sure you've seen all their CV's and references?Prohibition has only promoted and encouraged drug use, making drugs cheaper and easily available all over the world. That's an undeniable fact. I'm not waiting for snail pace governments to make changes in a bizarre and obviously terrible laws that's having the complete opposite effect to what it was intended to do.
Why wait? Why not got involved? Governements only look towards the next election. As drug use increases so will drug abuse and the short term strategy to tackle it is prohibition.I know where they get their "stuff" and it ain't from bigger dealers.
No blood involved, except maybe when they accidentally nick themselves with the secateurs.
No doubt there will be exceptions such as yourself, but it is not the general way in which the marijuana market operates.Snake Pliisken wrote: »Large amounts of money outside of taxation attracts criminals, surprise.
That's my point. It's erroneous to say it will remove the criminal element.Snake Pliisken wrote: »We really need to clamp down on this running craze, people are destroying they're bodies!
The only reason these people can get high is their brain carries around its own drugs that it releases under duress. The person is still 'doing' a drug, they're just not ingesting one.
It's a drug natural to the body though. One that is meant to be there and the body is well equipped to handle. i think we are sidetracked here though. I have no problem with people using certain drugs. i just disagree with the need to get high.Snake Pliisken wrote: »The same rules that apply to people who try and sell bootleg alcohol.
That's my point. Rules aren't always bad and are sometimes necessary.Snake Pliisken wrote: »I'm sure the government would do the maths so that they weren't taxing it low or too high.
It will always be trial and error. There's no way of predicting how the black market will respond to legalisation.Snake Pliisken wrote: »Read Defiler's comment.
I did. it doesn't change anything. wether you agree or disagree with the law the buyer is still the one making the conscious and deliberate choice to fund violent criminal organisations so that you can have a recreational experience. That responsability is all on the buyer.Snake Pliisken wrote: »The blood of African children is on your hands when you buy a computer or a mobile phone. Not to mention the slave hours worked by chinese people assembling those gadgets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan
Your clothes were probably made in a sweatshop by small, overworked hands.
The materials your house is made from were callously taken from where they occurred naturally.
Maybe. And if i believed it to be true I would not purchase the product. i can live without chinese made sweaters or iphones.Snake Pliisken wrote: »The alcohol you drink competes with domestic abuse and sex abuse for the lead cause of broken homes. If everyone stopped drinking it they'd stop making it.
I very rarely drink and when I do i don't get wasted. Alcohol abuse is the biggest problem in Ireland as far as I am concerned. I wouldn't miss it if it disappeared tomorrow.Yes it would if done properly. How big is the alcohol industry? And it wouldn't be about "tax incentives, it would be about not placing 300% taxes on it or whatever the crazy figure with cigarettes is. You also continually ignore that despite the high taxes, the vast majority of cigarettes are still purchased legally.
Yes but how long has the alcohol and cigarette industry been in operation? It's not an overnight transition to make it a properly regulated market.Other poster have already dealt with this. It's not the wire here.
Other posters are living in denial.Government, scientists, teachers, healthcare workers, lobby groups whoever. Same people who educate about alcohol and cigarettes. And no, I'd say a few hour session would suffice to educate people about the pros and cons of cannabis use.
There you assume that people are as reasonable or intelligent as you. Some people would not listen. Some wouldn't even go to the class.Yes, they probably would.
You see there the line has moved again. You have just regulated the behaviour of more people. It was necessary though. it doesn't make you an enemy of freedom.If it is not taxed crazily, then the dealers will be unable to undercut the legal suppliers. Grams go for as little as a fiver in Amsterdam. When have I ever said I am against regulation of it? But with cannabis it is almost moot point anyway given how safe it is.
It's only safe if it is manufactured, used and prepared responsably.Another strawman. Again, you are missing the risk the driver puts people at. I am not in favour of speeding or shooting guns into crowded spaces with the intention of missing either.
i am not missing the risk. That's my whole point.This has to be one of the most pig ignorant comments I've seen here in quite a long time.
In Iran it's illegal to be homosexual and punishable by death. Therefore you don't respect human rights of the gay men and women who wish to fulfill their wants?
Just because something is illegal doesn't make it right. There are ridiculous laws all over the world. Cannabis being illegal is one of them.
PS: I'm not a smoker.
I find it amusing that you call a poster pig ignorant and then refer to homsexuality as a "want". Homosexualiy is a prt of who you are. Cannabis smoking is a recreational activity. Please don't try to compare the two as if they are the same.0 -
You are likely correct. But cannabis is not legal so purchasing it is voluntarily funding murder. There's no way around that fact.
The responsability lies with the person who funds them. That is to drug buyer who gives money to a dealer for a recreational product knowing full well the money is going to criminals. That is a conscious choice. Your denial of responsability is also tiresome
DVD's aren't over taxed but the black market trade is still booming. Why do you think cannabis would be different?
In that case there is no reason why people should not be allowed to grow for personal use. They are not funding the dealers.
Most people would buy from the legal outlets, as quality and consistency can be assured, if they were allowed.0 -
If you are genuinely that concerned for your health then put down that cigarette, cup of coffee and beer because alcohol, tobacco and caffeine are far more dangerous than cannabis and cause thousands deaths each year where cannabis causes none.
Caffeine causes thousands of deaths a year?0 -
Advertisement
-
Caffeine causes thousands of deaths a year?
Maybe not thousands but it has been, unlike cannibas, directly linked to a number. Here's one example:
Fourteen-year-old Anais Fournier was drinking energy drinks at the mall with her friends on Dec. 16.
Six days later, the South Hagerstown High School student was pronounced brain dead. Her death certificate lists the cause as a heart arrhythmia due to caffeine toxicity. Anais drank two Monster energy drinks in less than 24 hours.0 -
You are likely correct. But cannabis is not legal so purchasing it is voluntarily funding murder. There's no way around that fact
That's a sweeping statement that doesn't stand up. There is cannabis sold that doesn't have any connection to gangland whatsoever.The responsability lies with the person who funds them. That is to drug buyer who gives money to a dealer for a recreational product knowing full well the money is going to criminals. That is a conscious choice. Your denial of responsability is also tiresome
You are twisting this entire thread into "Buying drugs funds murderers". It's pointless and off-topic, people don't want to be funding criminals but that's the way the system is, and like I mentioned before it forms part of the argument for legalisation.
I don't think we're going to agree with the whole 'responsibility' argument. Yes, drug-dealing funds criminals but they have been created by an unjust system. The person dealing may be a 'criminal' in the eyes of the law but the way you are going on you'd swear they are all murderers and psychopaths. That's just not the way it is in reality.
Anyone who murders is responsible for their own actions. Trying to twist that and use it as a stick to beat recreational drug-users is a dishonest tactic IMO.0 -
Boombastic wrote: »Maybe not thousands but it has been, unlike cannibas, directly linked to a number. Here's one example:
Fourteen-year-old Anais Fournier was drinking energy drinks at the mall with her friends on Dec. 16.
Six days later, the South Hagerstown High School student was pronounced brain dead. Her death certificate lists the cause as a heart arrhythmia due to caffeine toxicity. Anais drank two Monster energy drinks in less than 24 hours.
I would imagine that's pretty rare.
A figure of 2000 people was provided earlier in the thread for deaths caused by caffeine in the US in a year. A tiny amount, and how many of those might have had undiagnosed heart conditions? Going off that figure, assuming caffeine rates are similar in Ireland, you'd be talking 30ish deaths per annum. And we'd have lower consumption rates of coffee than the US.0 -
I don't agree with that at all. On a personal level drug use is rarely a problem, that's a fact, the majority of people who use drugs don't develop any kind of dependency. Just like the majority of alcohol users don't end up as alcoholics. The problem is the playground the law creates for criminals, and that problem is all the governments doing. I like weed and I'm going to smoke weed, there's nothing wrong with that. I can't do anything about the supply chain the same way I can't do anything about the supply chain with any other product I buy. I try to spend my money as morally as I can. IE: I don't buy cheap chicken and try to keep my purchases as local as possible buying in the EU if I can. Buying good quality weed that's grown in Ireland) but after that it's outside of my hands.The responsability lies with the person who funds them. That is to drug buyer who gives money to a dealer for a recreational product knowing full well the money is going to criminals. That is a conscious choice. Your denial of responsability is also tiresome
That's wrong. It's very easy to tell the difference between home grown weed and imported weed and the home grown is nearly always better than anything imported because home grown has to travel less so it's potency doesn't degrade as much.There are very few people out there who could grow sufficient quantities to deal to more than a few friends. The majority is imported.
There's no need to import, you set up a warehouse or even a simple grow tunnel and you can grow loads of it relatively easily.Exactly how would leglally grown weed be cheaper than weed that is grown in massive bulk and imported without any tax?
It's the ease at which plants could be grown in large scale that will make it a fraction of the cost. Many illegal grows dump a lot of the gear or loss it when the house is found and the house will be discovered sooner or later. They are limited for space and have to spend to get an unsuitable house up to scratch for growing. All these costs will be avoided by a legal grow, they'll have vastly reduced running costs per kilo, they'll be on business rates for electricity and will be able to sell off unused parts of the plant.
It's an indisputable fact that legal grows will be much cheaper.
I know many off them for years and the closet they've ever got to a gun is playing Call of Duty. Organised crime gangs will intimidate growers and because their outside of the law they can't do anything about it but again that's a problem with the way the legal system deals with the over all problem it's not really down to the people involved.And I'm sure you've seen all their CV's and references?0 -
I would imagine that's pretty rare.
A figure of 2000 people was provided earlier in the thread for deaths caused by caffeine in the US in a year. A tiny amount, and how many of those might have had undiagnosed heart conditions? Going off that figure, assuming caffeine rates are similar in Ireland, you'd be talking 30ish deaths per annum. And we'd have lower consumption rates of coffee than the US.
Still more than the 0 deaths directly caused by cannibas.0 -
Boombastic wrote: »Still more than the 0 deaths directly caused by cannibas.
More research is coming to light all the time though. If cannabis is linked to psychosis, well, that can lead to suicide. Not a direct cause, but are those the only causes that matter?0 -
Boombastic wrote: »Still more than the 0 deaths directly caused by cannibas.
This is one of the most annoying myths that is perpetuated constantly. The most of the same carcinogens from smoking tobacco come from smoking marijuana. It's not healthy and the idea that it has never killed anybody would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic.
In my opinion, people can do what they like. I would even be for legalising cannabis as there are plenty of worse drugs which are legal.....so why not legalise it? There is plenty worse out there in the stores.
But please, stop spreading misinformation about cannabis being as harmless as kittens. It's wrong and it just gives the "no" side a stick to beat you with.0 -
It has been linked to schizophrenia in young adults. It's a real link and people under 18, probably 21 shouldn't try it if they have schizophrenia in the family. I don't think there's any genuine links to any other mental issues and there should be some pretty definitive prove by now.More research is coming to light all the time though. If cannabis is linked to psychosis, well, that can lead to suicide. Not a direct cause, but are those the only causes that matter?0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
More research is coming to light all the time though. If cannabis is linked to psychosis, well, that can lead to suicide. Not a direct cause, but are those the only causes that matter?
Not the only thing that matters. But truth is cannibas use is widespread whether it's legal or not, so these problems are existent anyway.
How much drug education and awareness is given in schools?
It depends on what the relationship is between the two is. According to live scienceThe nature of the relationship between psychosis and cannabis use is by no means simple," they write.
Individuals who had experienced hallucinations early in life were more likely to have used cannabis longer and to use it more frequently.
"This demonstrates the complexity of the relationship: those individuals who were vulnerable to psychosis (i.e., those who had isolated psychotic symptoms) were more likely to commence cannabis use, which could then subsequently contribute to an increased risk of conversion to a non-affective psychotic disorder."0 -
In Iran it's illegal to be homosexual and punishable by death. Therefore you don't respect human rights of the gay men and women who wish to fulfill their wants?
Lol, I cannot believe you're comparing the oppresion (and execution) of gay men and women in Iran to...not being able to get high.0 -
He's not no, there's no need to go to that extreme just to ignore his point. Just because something is law doesn't make it right, moral or good for anybody.Lol, I cannot believe you're comparing the oppresion (and execution) of gay men and women in Iran to...not being able to get high.0 -
Everyone else has already given all the positive of legislation so I will take a slightly different tack (I think. I haven’t read everything).
I am currently in college in NUI Galway. There was an unofficial rag week down there last year. Look at this video. Now while everyone there was drunk and causing untold damage I happened to be with a couple of people smoking (well actually vaporizing) 'weed'. I was not smoking myself. However while partly everyone other college student was out causing damage there was 4 people smoking weed in some house. They simply sat around and talked about the nature of reality and partial physics and other mad philospocal stuff. The next day there was about 10/200 people in their first lecture. The 4 of them, a couple of mature students and a few others who weren’t out getting stupidly drunk and making fools of themselves.
How cannabis is considered a bad thing when alcohol abuse among young people is almost praised?
The cannabis laws are stupid. However there has been many a stupid law down through our history (which have already been pointed out). Just because something is illegal doesn't necessary mean that it is wrong or immoral? Let’s remember that women working while married was illegal not so long ago.
Laws are made by people and can be change by people. However it took women to stand up and demand there right and demand that the laws be changed before it happened. This now has to happen with cannabis. And I believe that it will. People are slowly realizing that it is not a bad thing and It is not the evil that it is depicted to be. We only have to look at the comments here to see that opinions are changing. Yes there are still a lot of people against but a growing number are in favor.
Mods: Is it possible to change this tread into a poll so we can see the numbers of people for/ against/ don’t care?0 -
A poll here means nothing.....0
-
-
More research is coming to light all the time though. If cannabis is linked to psychosis, well, that can lead to suicide. Not a direct cause, but are those the only causes that matter?
Research like this that says the converse.........Testing hypotheses about the relationship between cannabis use and
psychosis
Louisa Degenhardt *, Wayne Hall, Michael Lynskey
National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Aim: To model the impact of rising rates of cannabis use on the incidence and prevalence of psychosis under four hypotheses
about the relationship between cannabis use and psychosis. Methods: The study modelled the effects on the prevalence of
schizophrenia over the lifespan of cannabis in eight birth cohorts: 1940/1944, 1945/1949, 1950/1954, 1955/1959, 1960/1964,
1965/1969, 1970/1974, 1975/1979.
4.1. Does cannabis use cause psychosis?
The hypothesis that cannabis causes schizophrenia
was not supported by the data on trends in the incidence
of this psychosis in Australia. There was no evidence
that there has been an increase in incidence over the past
30 years of the magnitude predicted by the hypothesis.
This suggests that cannabis use has not caused cases of
psychosis that would not otherwise have occurred.
Conclusions
This study has used modelling (incorporating databased
parameters) to predict what changes we would
expect to see in the incidence and prevalence of
schizophrenia if each of four hypotheses about the
relationships between cannabis use and psychosis were
true. The claim about cannabis and psychosis is widely
understood in the popular media and public debate in
Australia to imply that cannabis use has increased the
number of cases of psychosis in the population (in the
sense of causing cases of psychosis that would not
otherwise have occurred). It is therefore interesting that
using plausible assumptions, the present modelling
exercise suggests that (a) cannabis use as a cause of
cases of psychosis does not fit the data; and (b) it would
be difficult to detect any increases even if cannabis use
was a cause of incidence among those vulnerable to the
disorder.
Notably, if there were a common causal mechanism
for the association between cannabis use and psychosis,
whereby common factors increased the likelihood of
both cannabis use and psychosis, we would expect
to see increases in psychosis along with increases in
cannabis use. Since this was not the case, there does not
appear to be strong support for common causes
completely explaining the association that has been
observed.
http://ukcia.org/research/TestingHypotheses.pdf0 -
So many haters here but with no real reason for it.
I think everyone can agree that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol, so whats the big problem?
Regulate it, tax it, whatever... thats all fine. Maybe we would see a few less heroine addicts around if it was legal.0 -
I don't agree with that at all. On a personal level drug use is rarely a problem, that's a fact, the majority of people who use drugs don't develop any kind of dependency. Just like the majority of alcohol users don't end up as alcoholics. The problem is the playground the law creates for criminals, and that problem is all the governments doing. I like weed and I'm going to smoke weed, there's nothing wrong with that. I can't do anything about the supply chain the same way I can't do anything about the supply chain with any other product I buy. I try to spend my money as morally as I can. IE: I don't buy cheap chicken and try to keep my purchases as local as possible buying in the EU if I can. Buying good quality weed that's grown in Ireland) but after that it's outside of my hands.
That's wrong. It's very easy to tell the difference between home grown weed and imported weed and the home grown is nearly always better than anything imported because home grown has to travel less so it's potency doesn't degrade as much.
There's no need to import, you set up a warehouse or even a simple grow tunnel and you can grow loads of it relatively easily.
It's the ease at which plants could be grown in large scale that will make it a fraction of the cost. Many illegal grows dump a lot of the gear or loss it when the house is found and the house will be discovered sooner or later. They are limited for space and have to spend to get an unsuitable house up to scratch for growing. All these costs will be avoided by a legal grow, they'll have vastly reduced running costs per kilo, they'll be on business rates for electricity and will be able to sell off unused parts of the plant.
It's an indisputable fact that legal grows will be much cheaper.
I know many off them for years and the closet they've ever got to a gun is playing Call of Duty. Organised crime gangs will intimidate growers and because their outside of the law they can't do anything about it but again that's a problem with the way the legal system deals with the over all problem it's not really down to the people involved.
If its so cheap to grow why does it cost 300 for an ounce when you can get pollen or soapbar for a fraction of the cost and thats imported..i think0 -
Advertisement
-
wildlifeboy wrote: »If its so cheap to grow why does it cost 300 for an ounce when you can get pollen or soapbar for a fraction of the cost and thats imported..i think
That's what the black market does, inflates the price0
Advertisement