Should pot be made legal?

Riddle101

Now i'm not a pot smoker myself, nor have i ever taken drugs at all, but i was just wondering if you think pot should be made legal. I know there is or was a debate in England over whether pot should be legalised or not and it got me thinking, should it be legalised. I mean compared to the other drugs it's not as bad, as a matter of fact, it's actually considered as medication for some medical cases. Not saying it dosen't have problems but I think it shouldn't be taken as seriously as Cocaine. So what do you think?

Dr. Baltar

I personally do not smoke cannabis, but I blieve that it should definately be legalised. Cigarettes kill millions more people yearly, and yet they remain legal. Alcohol too is responsible for numerous deaths and criminal activity.

Since humans began smoking Cannabis thousands of years ago, there has been no recorded overdose. Overdoses have ocurred when people have smoked impure cannabis bought from the street which has been mixed with numerous chemicals such as rat poison.

Here is a chart showing the danger of cannabis in relation to other drugs:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs

It must also be noted that users of Cannabis do not participate in criminal activity directly from smokingcannabis i.e. they do not get angry or "wired up" like what alcohol does to them.

Many people are injured from drug gangs around the country because of debts owed by cannabis.

Therefore, if cannabis was legalised, it would give the state more income, it would take cannabis out of the hands of criminals who poison the substance making it more harmful, it would remove the aspect of criminal gangs hurting others for money owed through cannabis use and would also bring in a lot of tourism as can be seen in Amsterdam.

Akrasia

I always find it a bit ironic that the Gardai drugs squad are out in force at every summer festival taking people's weed off them, but doing nothing about people drinking gallons of alcohol. Especially considering the fact that in recent years there has been more and more violence at irish festivals, and that is caused by drink and not cannabis.
The 'keepers of the peace' are causing violence by removing the mellowing effect of grass and allowing the demon drink to be consumed to excess.

There is absolutely no good reason for cannabis to be illegal when there are drugs a million times more dangerous available in off licenses and pharmacies around the country

SeanW

Precisely. I personally have very little interest in marijuana, but I feel that its prohibition is nothing more than paranoid Nanny Statism gone mad. And I feel it is counterproductive as it has all the same effects as the Alcohol Prohibitions of the American 1930s, in terms of fuelling the criminal black market, lack of legal protection for customers etc.

As a citizen on whose partial behalf these laws are made, I consider it none of my business to tell someone else not to smoke pot if they want to - as long as they don't hurt anyone else due to irresponsible behaviour.

murphaph

Legalise and hence quality and price control all drugs I say. Seriously, if people want to abuse themselves with any chemical then we as a society should do our best to discourage them through education but assuming that education fails and an individual decides to take a chemical (be it a prohibited one or alcohol etc.) then society should minimise the potential negative effects on everyone else. The statistics are well known and understood-remove the drugs and you remove a majority of the crime. We will NEVER be able to remove the drugs IMO and so we should ensure addicts receive their drugs from the state-take the control away from drug dealers for a start.

We allow people to smoke and drink-these activities cause plenty of harm to individuals and cost to society for hospital treatment for the illnesses they cause. Why should 'drugs' be any different?

The current 'system' clearly does not work. Despite heroin being a proscribed substance, we have the second highest addiction rates in the EU after (I believe) Glasgow. Vast amounts of money are stolen every year to pay drug dealers for their wares. Can it really get worse by legalisation and state control? I don't believe so.

BlackMirror

Um, yeah. Sure it should be legal.

Wait, what should be legal again? I forgot.

SeanW

BlackMirror wrote: »

Um, yeah. Sure it should be legal.

Wait, what should be legal again? I forgot.

Your point being?

kraggy

Think his point is that dope is for dopes.

Legalising cannabis would be a terrible decision in my opinion.

Have seen countless people I know end up in psychiatric wards and there's no way all of them would have ended up there if they hadn't smoked hash.

People tend to see the light-hearted side of smoking cannabis, the whole chilled out, laid back image that is so common in modern media.

However, there is an extremely dark side to the consumption of this drug. The effects are real and the effects are more common than many like to think.

True, smoking a couple of joints on a saturday night in someone's sitting room is unlikely to cause adverse effects, but the problem with Ireland is that we tend not to do things by halves. e.g. drinking. When we drink, we drink hard.

And if pot was legalised here, besides the unwanted scum moving here from overseas a la amsterdam, our workforce would become less effective and our already over-worked health system would be overflowing in the psychiatric department at least.

Liam Byrne

I would've said yeah, but kraggy has a point; we can wax lyrical about how drink is the cause of violence, etc, and how cannibas would be a drug that just chills people out, but the fact is that a HUGE majority in this country can't seem to do anything in moderation......when they drink, they drink to get completely hammered, rather than have a social night out......

So in an ideal world, both alcohol and cannibas would be legalised, but until Irish people cop themselves on it's not an option.

SeanW

OK, lets ban alcahol then. Perhaps we should get rid of cigarettes too since nicotine products are, by their very nature, impossible to do in anything resembling moderation. No more A&E queues! The hospitals would go out of business!

Ireland seems to be doing a lot of world-leading these days. Banning patio heaters, incandescent lightbulbs, indoor smoking, taxing plastic bags, banning this, taxing that, why not lead the world in doing something that involves REDUCING the Nanny State for a change? Allowing a responsible individual to chill out on a Saturday night seems like a good place to start. Let's not forget about medicinal marijuana, which some people with terminal illnesses and pain swear by.

The case to keep marijuana illegal is at best marginal, particularly with the legal drugs which are far worse.

kraggy

SeanW wrote: »

OK, lets ban alcahol then. Perhaps we should get rid of cigarettes too since nicotine products are, by their very nature, impossible to do in anything resembling moderation. No more A&E queues! The hospitals would go out of business!

Ireland seems to be doing a lot of world-leading these days. Banning patio heaters, incandescent lightbulbs, indoor smoking, taxing plastic bags, banning this, taxing that, why not lead the world in doing something that involves REDUCING the Nanny State for a change? Allowing a responsible individual to chill out on a Saturday night seems like a good place to start. Let's not forget about medicinal marijuana, which some people with terminal illnesses and pain swear by.

The case to keep marijuana illegal is at best marginal, particularly with the legal drugs which are far worse.

How exactly are legal drugs far worse?

It's becoming a bit monotonous these days the way people are jumping on the "cigarettes and alcohol are just as bad, if not worse" bandwagon. Very weak basis for an argument.

Compare tobacco with cannabis for example. Cigarettes, granted, kill thousands in this country every year through various cancers and non-cancer lung disease.

Cannabis is several times more carcinogenic than any tobacco. Furthermore, there are the psychological problems that an extraordinarily high proportion of smokers get through prolonged consumption.

So, if a cigarette smoker smokes a lot over a prolonged period of time, the risk that he/she will require medical attention is less than if said smoker smoked cannabis over a prolonged period of time.

Hundreds of millions of euro are spent on the treatment of alcohol and tobacco related illnesses every year. Why spend more by legalising another harmful drug?

Also, are you really that naive to think that the majority of people in this country would limit their smoking of cannabis to saturday nights if it were legalised?

And your point about the nanny state. You seem to forget that the health service is paid for by us all in the form of various taxes. So preventing a massive increase in the required expenditure that would undoubtedly result from the legalistation of cannabis is to the benefit of you and me, not just the suits who sit around the cabinet table.

DeVore

Someone one bring me some facts:

1. How much is spent on public, medical expenditure on Alcohol , Cigarettes, illegal drugs of all kinds. (3 numbers please).

2. How many serious drug dealers are there in Ireland?

3. How much of their income is from selling cannabis vs selling harder drugs?

4. How many could/would continue on the income from non-cannabis drugs alone.

Estimates off the top of your head are fine (so long as you identify them as such).

Lets bring some science to this argument

DeV.

DeVore

by the way, when people say that cannabis is more carcinogenic then cigarettes, they mean comparing a joint with a cigarette. I know a lot of people with a 20-a-day cigarette habit and none with a 20-a-day joint habit. Something to think about...

DeV.

duggie-89

i think it should be. simply as that. a few facts that i "known" or well have been told are true is that a cannibis plant can be grown fast and be used for making paper and so we wont have to cut down trees and for the time it takes to grow one tree there could be 3-4 crops of cannibis grown.

i also believe that it isnt as harmful as other drugs. a band named the streets i think done a song on it and it convinced me totaly.

also if the gov where to tax cannibis then more money could be raised for the health service and even it could raise money for policing the drunks at the end of a late sat nite lol

invincibleirish

The wests obsession with criminalizing certain drugs has failed, the decades long 'war on drugs' persued by the US is an abject failure. it matters not whether cannabis is legal or illegal it will always be there.

in todays Observer you'll read about Guinea-Bissau, "the worlds first narco state", it is an example of what is happening to satisfy western demands for drugs. Thailand, Afganistan, Columbia to name some are countries which face enormous difficulties in fighting a powerful black market trade in drugs.

the sooner people approach the question of legalising drugs and taking their production/sale out of the hands of various not-nice people and groups the better, be they scumbags in Ireland, Corrupt officials in the far east or organised and armed Cartels in south America, the money you spend on drugs goes into a seedy black market. it does not have to be like that.

In Ireland weed should be treated the same as alcohol.

PaintingMedium

To answer the question of this thread, no, I do not think it should be legal.

Firstly, as a debate, I think we should not include other harmful legal drugs such as cigarettes or alcohol in the debate. I think it is quite silly to state that simply because one drug is legal and causes huge problems, then another drug which is very harmful but not does not create as many social problems, should be legalised. We all know the problems that alcohol abuse creates, but if this is a reason to legalise another harmful drug, then that is just plain stupid. Stick to the cannabis and argue on its merits alone. If you need to argue about alcohol abuse to create a stong argument, then it is a really weak argument.

Cannabis is a harmful drug and causes huge problems. I cannot think of one community which has benifited from cannabis use. Can you?
I used cannabis in the past, and from looking back on my time as a teen using it, I cannot believe the waste. It was the first illegal drug my friends or I used. Some went on to other drugs, some ended their own lives through drug use, and some like myself stop using it and copped on.

People will argue that personal use is okay, but as a society, we should be trying to better ourselves and creating a better foundation for the next generation.

If we look at the Netherlands, most Dutch people from outside Amsterdam are so embarrassed at the situation, hence the huge crackdown. They have realised that it is not some liberal utopia that was created, but a scum filled gutter where the image and credibility of a state was damaged for a long time. Many Dutch will not even visit that city, which is a pity because without the stupid stoners walking around, it is such a nice city with great history and culture.

In closing, at a personal level, I do not care if someone smokes a joint every once in a while, I would not socialise with them though. But if I was thinking of the future of Ireland, then no, I would not be in favour of legalising it.

cavedave

DeVore

Someone one bring me some facts:

1. How much is spent on public, medical expenditure on Alcohol , Cigarettes, illegal drugs of all kinds. (3 numbers please).

2. How many serious drug dealers are there in Ireland?

3. How much of their income is from selling cannabis vs selling harder drugs?

4. How many could/would continue on the income from non-cannabis drugs alone.
.

1. Is hard to measure. Smokers get lung cancer young and die quickly so they may save money because you do not have the high health care costs "healthy" people have&. Most of the costs of illegal drugs are legal 65% of people in jail in Ireland are there for heroin crime (no reference).

4. "Cannabis resin valued at €48.7m was seized"* Say 5% of cannabis is seized. That would put the cannabis market here at 1000 million.
Heroin has a 40000% mark up between the farmer and the final dealer.^ I presume cocaine has a similar mark up. I doubt cannabis has this much mark up. But you could do better then the 1/3 production 1/3 sales 1/3 tax model of alcohol. So without increasing cannabis usage you could receive more then 300 million in tax from legalised (not decriminalised) cannabis. If cannabis is worth 1 billion removing that money from drug dealers would reduce their numbers.

$http://www.penguin.co.uk/UKExtract/0,,MTA5Njc1MzowOkZyZWFrb25vbWljcw==,00.html
&http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/337/15/1052
^http://www.ablemesh.co.uk/thoughtsillegaldrugs.html
*http://hrbndc.imaxan.ie/directory/news_detail.php?cat_id=&news_id=3585&pointer=0

kraggy

DeVore wrote: »

by the way, when people say that cannabis is more carcinogenic then cigarettes, they mean comparing a joint with a cigarette. I know a lot of people with a 20-a-day cigarette habit and none with a 20-a-day joint habit. Something to think about...

DeV.

True Devore, but read this article and you'll see that smoking just 2 joints in a day is actually worse than smoking 20 cigarettes from a cancer point of view.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUKT9240120080129

kraggy

invincibleirish wrote: »

The wests obsession with criminalizing certain drugs has failed, the decades long 'war on drugs' persued by the US is an abject failure. it matters not whether cannabis is legal or illegal it will always be there.

in todays Observer you'll read about Guinea-Bissau, "the worlds first narco state", it is an example of what is happening to satisfy western demands for drugs. Thailand, Afganistan, Columbia to name some are countries which face enormous difficulties in fighting a powerful black market trade in drugs.

the sooner people approach the question of legalising drugs and taking their production/sale out of the hands of various not-nice people and groups the better, be they scumbags in Ireland, Corrupt officials in the far east or organised and armed Cartels in south America, the money you spend on drugs goes into a seedy black market. it does not have to be like that.

In Ireland weed should be treated the same as alcohol.

Why should it be treated the same when the psychological effects are more hazardous and widespread in cannabis usage?

Jim_Are_Great

kraggy wrote: »

However, there is an extremely dark side to the consumption of this drug. The effects are real and the effects are more common than many like to think.

The effects are real, and occasionally severe. However, I can hardly think of any one of my contemporaries who have not smoked or consumed cannabis, and none of them are in any way harmed, addicted or worse off. Don't exaggerate the drug's adverse effects.

kraggy wrote: »

True, smoking a couple of joints on a saturday night in someone's sitting room is unlikely to cause adverse effects, but the problem with Ireland is that we tend not to do things by halves. e.g. drinking. When we drink, we drink hard.

Ah, yes - the Irish public are stupid, irresponsible and not to be trusted. We must hark to our betters in parliament to make our presonal choices for us. Good point.

kraggy wrote: »

if pot was legalised here, our workforce would become less effective.

I don't get this line of thinking, care to elaborate?

PaintingMedium wrote: »

I think it is quite silly to state that simply because one drug is legal and causes huge problems, then another drug which is very harmful but not does not create as many social problems, should be legalised.

It's not silly, it's cogent. I'd like to see a justification for the policy double-standard, or else remove it by prohibiting drugs with equal, or more, harmful potential than cannabis.

Naysayers: give us a reason to maintain cannabis's illegality beyond the fact that it's not healthy; many things are unhealthy but legal.

Tell us why the destructive effects of cannabis must be met with a ban, whereas cigarettes, absynthe and fast food are merely regulated.

Present us with an argument that is more persuasive than the reduction of power of illigitimate dealers, or the potential to remove extraneous substances from street-vended cannabis.

kraggy

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

The effects are real, and occasionally severe. However, I can hardly think of any one of my contemporaries who have not smoked or consumed cannabis, and none of them are in any way harmed, addicted or worse off. Don't exaggerate the drug's adverse effects.

.

Ah, yes - the Irish public are stupid, irresponsible and not to be trusted. We must hark to our betters in parliament to make our presonal choices for us. Good point.





I don't get this line of thinking, care to elaborate?



It's not silly, it's cogent. I'd like to see a justification for the policy double-standard, or else remove it by prohibiting drugs with equal, or more, harmful potential than cannabis.

Naysayers: give us a reason to maintain cannabis's illegality beyond the fact that it's not healthy; many things are unhealthy but legal.

Tell us why the destructive effects of cannabis must be met with a ban, whereas cigarettes, absynthe and fast food are merely regulated.

Present us with an argument that is more persuasive than the reduction of power of illigitimate dealers, or the potential to remove extraneous substances from street-vended cannabis.

Your friends are lucky and exceptional. As stated previously, I have witnessed first hand several cases of schizophrenia and depression as a result of consuming cannabis. This is my experience. I need not elaborate any more.

With regard to you thinking that I consider the Irish population stupid, no, I don't think we are a stupid people. However, are you telling me that there wouldn't be more people smoking larger quantities of cannabis if it were legalised? We, as a nation, can't even be mature about alcohol. How can you expect us to be mature about cannabis?

Finally, in relation to my point about our workforce, smoking kills ambition and sharpness of the mind. Many smokers find it hard to get up in the morning and open the curtains never mind do a day's work. Again, first hand experience. This in turn has effects on productivity, thus, the economy and our wealth as a nation.

Jim_Are_Great

kraggy wrote: »

However, are you telling me that there wouldn't be more people smoking larger quantities of cannabis if it were legalised.

Actually, yes. I think there are very few people on the borderline thinking "Man, I'd smoke some weed right now, if only it were legal." Your own comments are full of evidence to suggest that many, if not most, people can and do have easy access to cannabis, despite its illegality. The laws against cannabis are obviously, therefore, of very little deterrant value. As of now, if people want cannabis, they can and will get it, no problem. By legalising it, there is unlikely to be a significant surge in cannabis consumer numbers, but there would certainly be opportunity for the cleaning up of the whole production and distribution process to make it safer.

kraggy wrote: »

We, as a nation, can't even be mature about alcohol. How can you expect us to be mature about cannabis?

Perhaps because alcohol is more addictive and potent than cannabis?

kraggy wrote: »

Finally, in relation to my point about our workforce, smoking kills ambition and sharpness of the mind. Many smokers find it hard to get up in the morning and open the curtains never mind do a day's work. Again, first hand experience. This in turn has effects on productivity, thus, the economy and our wealth as a nation.

You seem to be constantly operating on the assumption of excess. People will not smoke so much pot that they can't work adequately, no more than people's alcohol consumption, no matter how excessive, affects the workrate. If legal cannabis had such an obliterating effect on the economy, how do you explain the thriving Dutch economy?

invincibleirish

kraggy wrote: »

Why should it be treated the same when the psychological effects are more hazardous and widespread in cannabis usage?

you make my point, we already know Cannabis use is widespread (endemic if you wish to phrase it as such), in Ireland, the UK, Europe and much of the world, my point is trying to restrict/regulate its usage or sale is useless, any attempts to do so are and have being a total failure and will be far into the future.

With regards the drugs mental effects, there are questions with regards cannabis addiction and mental issues, same as alcohol or any other drug. but be clear, people who suffer from Cannabis Schizophrenia* are heavy smokers (all day every day), however the vast majority of smokers lead regular lives.

To dismiss Cannabis because of a tiny % possibility of mental health side effects is nonsensical, again if that logic is applied to alcohol then there is an overwhelming case to press for a ban on alcohol, same for most prescription painkillers & anti depressants

* a trawl of online resources dispute whether it exists or not, basically more research needs to be done seems to be the general consensus.

AngryHippie

On Poly aromatic hydorcarbons

The primary sources of exposure to PAHs for most of the U.S. population are inhalation of the compounds in tobacco smoke, wood smoke, and ambient air, and consumption of PAHs in foods. For some people, the primary exposure to PAHs occurs in the workplace. PAHs have been found in coal tar production plants, coking plants, bitumen and asphalt production plants, coal-gasification sites, smoke houses, aluminum production plants, coal tarring facilities, and municipal trash incinerators. Workers may be exposed to PAHs by inhaling engine exhaust and by using products that contain PAHs in a variety of industries such as mining, oil refining, metalworking, chemical production, transportation, and the electrical industry. PAHs have also been found in other facilities where petroleum, petroleum products, or coal are used or where wood, cellulose, corn, or oil are burned. People living near waste sites containing PAHs may be exposed through contact with contaminated air, water, and soil.

You want to ban them too?

That'll really help your workforce and economy

I know that you are deliberately inhaling them by smoking joints, but what are the study results for vaporizers ?
Has a study been done ?
How about brownies?

it is a circular argument, at the end of the day, you cannot tell people what to do and expect them to comply because you say so, it is not justice in the practical sense of the word. freedom to choose. all the way.

Results from animal studies show that PAHs do not tend to be stored in your body for a long time. Most PAHs that enter the body leave within a few days, primarily in the feces and urine

.



http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/phs69.html

oscarBravo

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

Ah, yes - the Irish public are stupid, irresponsible and not to be trusted. We must hark to our betters in parliament to make our presonal choices for us. Good point.

I'm assuming this was intended ironically, but our endemic alcohol problem tends to point to the fact that we are, as a nation, stupid and irresponsible when it comes to intoxicating substances.

Jim_Are_Great

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm assuming this was intended ironically, but our endemic alcohol problem tends to point to the fact that we are, as a nation, stupid and irresponsible when it comes to intoxicating substances.

So our "stupidity" should be met by legislative prohibitions? Is that a serious proposition, regarding the actual alcohol, or hypothetical cannabis, consumption levels?

oscarBravo

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

So our "stupidity" should be met by legislative prohibitions? Is that a serious proposition, regarding the actual alcohol, or hypothetical cannabis, consumption levels?

Isn't that the point of legislation? To prevent us from, and/or punish us for, doing things that are potentially harmful to ourselves or others?

I don't know that prohibition is an effective means of control, but we don't seem to be able to handle the social problems that alcohol brings - perhaps we should address those before legalising any more drugs.

rowlandbrowner

I don’t think there is a need to legalise yet another vice. Alcohol is legal and is probably the most socially acceptable drug, but to see its negative effects you just have to stand around town on a Saturday night. People can argue that pot is less harmful than alcohol – and they are probably correct – but if that’s the case than this country has already shown itself to be too immature to use alcohol responsibility, and if that is supposedly the more harmful of the two then I can only imagine what the population would do if pot was made legal.

And maybe Government should not legislate what we put into our bodies, but, again, we have shown how stupid and irresponsible we behave with drink, so we have forfeited any argument there.

rowlandbrowner

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

So our "stupidity" should be met by legislative prohibitions? Is that a serious proposition, regarding the actual alcohol, or hypothetical cannabis, consumption levels?

Well our glaring stupidly which can be confirmed with a quick glance at the alcohol consumption levels should certainly not be met with the lifting of existing prohibitions.

BostonFenian

kraggy wrote: »

How exactly are legal drugs far worse?

It's becoming a bit monotonous these days the way people are jumping on the "cigarettes and alcohol are just as bad, if not worse" bandwagon. Very weak basis for an argument.

Compare tobacco with cannabis for example. Cigarettes, granted, kill thousands in this country every year through various cancers and non-cancer lung disease.

Cannabis is several times more carcinogenic than any tobacco. Furthermore, there are the psychological problems that an extraordinarily high proportion of smokers get through prolonged consumption.

So, if a cigarette smoker smokes a lot over a prolonged period of time, the risk that he/she will require medical attention is less than if said smoker smoked cannabis over a prolonged period of time.

Hundreds of millions of euro are spent on the treatment of alcohol and tobacco related illnesses every year. Why spend more by legalising another harmful drug?

Also, are you really that naive to think that the majority of people in this country would limit their smoking of cannabis to saturday nights if it were legalised?

And your point about the nanny state. You seem to forget that the health service is paid for by us all in the form of various taxes. So preventing a massive increase in the required expenditure that would undoubtedly result from the legalistation of cannabis is to the benefit of you and me, not just the suits who sit around the cabinet table.

Another interesting point about cigarettes is they are responsible for illness, disease and even death in people who have never smoked, but have been consistently around second hand smoke for years. Who speaks for them?

In addition, it's all well and good to say that people should be allowed to do whatever they want in isolation, but it very rarely ends in isolation. In fact most dead end self destructive behavior ends in psych wards, or expensive hospital care, or jail, and this costs taxpayer money, and at least in the US increased insurance costs for everyone.

Given all the negative effects of the things that are legal, I find it hard to believe the majority of world governments still consider Cannabis more dangerous than say, alcohol. I would support its legalization.

In short, it's impossible for someone to do something only to themselves.

Hellm0

Weed should be legalized without question, granted it can be taken to excess but everything can. I have smoked on and off now for coming up on 8 years and I can honestly say it has helped me overcome stress, physical injury and most of all boredom.

The prohibition of this fine plant is ignorant at best and Orwellian at worst. What is wrong with giving people the means by which to chill out and have a good time? My health is my own concern so please enough with the altruism. Add to this the fact that a regulated industry would provide quality assurance(I know people who have gotten collapsed lungs from smoking "glass weed") and any possible argument about public health care costs is negated.

Jim_Are_Great

oscarBravo wrote: »

Isn't that the point of legislation? To prevent us from, and/or punish us for, doing things that are potentially harmful to ourselves or others?

That depends fundamentally on the way you believe a state should operate. A subscriber to John Stewart Mill's original liberalist theory would say no; only that which does harm to others should be regulated, and the state has no business or authority interfering with individual autonomy. Admittedly, this is certainly not the basis on which our state, or any state, is run. However, it is a line of thinking which, at the very least, demands a high standard of proof from those who would restrict individual liberty at state level: if you will take away our freedom, give us a damn good reason for doing so.

oscarBravo wrote: »

we don't seem to be able to handle the social problems that alcohol brings - perhaps we should address those before legalising any more drugs.

That I thoroughly agree with. At the same time, I believe we can learn form our failures in alcohol control when implementing a structured system for controlling legal cannabis.

rowlandbrowner wrote: »

if that’s the case than this country has already shown itself to be too immature to use alcohol responsibility, and if that is supposedly the more harmful of the two then I can only imagine what the population would do if pot was made legal.

That argument necessitates making alcohol an illegal drug.

rowlandbrowner wrote: »

Well our glaring stupidly which can be confirmed with a quick glance at the alcohol consumption levels should certainly not be met with the lifting of existing prohibitions.

Again, I really don't think that the excessive consumption of alcohol by Irish people is due, entirely, to some sort of uncontrollable irresponsibility. We're not the genetically indulgent binge monsters some of the previous posts would have you believe. If we were, there would be a similar problem with other vices as well as alcohol. The alcohol problem here is due to a number of factors: the drinking culture, the inadequate controls effected and so on. If we implement proper regulations - real regulations - to combat the irresponsible aspect of substance use, we can manage cannabis better than we have alcohol.

oscarBravo

Hellm0 wrote: »

I have smoked on and off now for coming up on 8 years and I can honestly say it has helped me overcome stress, physical injury and most of all boredom.

The first two I'm prepared to accept, but the third I have trouble comprehending. Of all the things smoking pot can be, I wouldn't have thought it particularly exciting.

Hellm0 wrote: »

...any possible argument about public health care costs is negated.

That's a little sweeping. If someone smokes enough to give themselves cancer, or becomes a psychotic basket case, the public healthcare costs come back into the equation.

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

... I believe we can learn form our failures in alcohol control when implementing a structured system for controlling legal cannabis.

I don't think it's enough to learn from our failures. I think we would need to see those structures in place and working for alcohol before we even consider legalising weed.

Hellm0

oscarBravo wrote: »

The first two I'm prepared to accept, but the third I have trouble comprehending. Of all the things smoking pot can be, I wouldn't have thought it particularly exciting.

Touche but I'll challenge you to find me someone who's well toasted and board. Weed isn't exciting in and of itself it just makes the mundane seem less mundane:P

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a little sweeping. If someone smokes enough to give themselves cancer, or becomes a psychotic basket case, the public healthcare costs come back into the equation.

I agree I did make a generalization there for effect, allow me to clarify. The benefits of occasional marijuana use for those who can use it occasionally outweigh the potential costs of taking care of people who use it in a self abusing fashion. I can say this as the actual amount of people who would use marijuana(and only marijuana) in a self abusing fashion is negligible. People who use marijuana in conjunction with other, more damaging, substances are going to abuse themselves anyway and we cannot blame marijuana for this.

DeVore

If you want to attack genuinely dangerous drugs such as heroin and crack/cocaine then you need to kill the supply, not the demand.

If you remove the cash crop (quite literally!) you cut the dealers off from their revenue. If you cut off their money, then you greatly reduce the upside of being a dealer.

DeV.

AngryHippie

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm assuming this was intended ironically, but our endemic alcohol problem tends to point to the fact that we are, as a nation, stupid and irresponsible when it comes to intoxicating substances.

Or that it is widely marketed to an over exposed youth drinking culture, as a result it has secured its place in irish society.....

kraggy

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

Actually, yes. I think there are very few people on the borderline thinking "Man, I'd smoke some weed right now, if only it were legal." Your own comments are full of evidence to suggest that many, if not most, people can and do have easy access to cannabis, despite its illegality. The laws against cannabis are obviously, therefore, of very little deterrant value. As of now, if people want cannabis, they can and will get it, no problem. By legalising it, there is unlikely to be a significant surge in cannabis consumer numbers, but there would certainly be opportunity for the cleaning up of the whole production and distribution process to make it safer.


Perhaps because alcohol is more addictive and potent than cannabis?


You seem to be constantly operating on the assumption of excess. People will not smoke so much pot that they can't work adequately, no more than people's alcohol consumption, no matter how excessive, affects the workrate. If legal cannabis had such an obliterating effect on the economy, how do you explain the thriving Dutch economy?

Firstly, more people who were previously borderline with regard to actually sampling cannabis in the first instance would try it out and some of these would go on to become chronic smokers.

Secondly, there are those today smoking cannabis who would undoubtedly smoke more if it were a legal substance. I don't know how many times I've heard friends complain that they can't get any smoke cause of a drought or whatever. The longing in their facial expression is pathetic.

Thirdly, you say that if it were legalised that it would clean up the drug thus making it safer. I'd slightly agree with this point if it were in relation to mdma or something but cannabis, even when cultivated in a controlled, labratory environment with minimum interference is highly carcinogenic. So the health risk is still there.

Finally, I can not fathom your last point whatsoever. You reckon that nobody smokes cannabis in sufficiently high quanitities for it to affect their work life? Well I was no major smoker, but even I missed some mornings as a result of smoking the night before. It wasn't that I was physically unable to rise out the bed, it was the killing of my ambition that prevented me from getting up and doing a days work.

And you also say that alcohol consumption, no matter how much, will not affect the work rate. How many people can't even get into work on a monday morning because of alcohol never mind put in a good days labour? Answer: thousands.

invincibleirish

Here's the thing: many many people across the world right now are stoned, and pretty much all of them will get up in the morning. you seem to imply that if Cannabis is made legal it will have knock on effects on our economic performance? ridiculous, last time i checked, Canada, Switzerland & the Netherlands seemed to be doing OK economically and they are all countries where weed is decriminalized and is freely available.

Not for the first time in this thread i will have to apply your logic to other substances like alcohol: im pretty certain alcohol is responsible for many sick days or poor performances at work, shall we ban that?, stop acting like a nanny, you cannot legislate to protect people from themselves.

If weed made you not show up for work then i feel sorry for you, but amongst i and many of my friends we seem to have little trouble getting on with our lives despite our fondness to smoke spliffs.

Ri na hEireann

kraggy wrote: »

Firstly, more people who were previously borderline with regard to actually sampling cannabis in the first instance would try it out and some of these would go on to become chronic smokers.

Secondly, there are those today smoking cannabis who would undoubtedly smoke more if it were a legal substance. I don't know how many times I've heard friends complain that they can't get any smoke cause of a drought or whatever. The longing in their facial expression is pathetic.

Thirdly, you say that if it were legalised that it would clean up the drug thus making it safer. I'd slightly agree with this point if it were in relation to mdma or something but cannabis, even when cultivated in a controlled, labratory environment with minimum interference is highly carcinogenic. So the health risk is still there.

Finally, I can not fathom your last point whatsoever. You reckon that nobody smokes cannabis in sufficiently high quanitities for it to affect their work life? Well I was no major smoker, but even I missed some mornings as a result of smoking the night before. It wasn't that I was physically unable to rise out the bed, it was the killing of my ambition that prevented me from getting up and doing a days work.

And you also say that alcohol consumption, no matter how much, will not affect the work rate. How many people can't even get into work on a monday morning because of alcohol never mind put in a good days labour? Answer: thousands.

I completely agrre with most if not all you have said.

Just on a personal level I know many of my peers who smoke cannabis regularily. Alot of them used to be quite intellectual individuals who have slowly but surely plumetted into a life of laziness and lack of ambition. All of them seem to voice the same opinion as users here- that they're not affected nor has it done them any harm whatsoever. Coincidental? I think not.... The fact remains that their brains are working at a pace half of what they used to be. Why make another scourge on society freely available. Any detterent is a good one however strong it is.

Alcohol is embroidered into our culture and unfortunately the way we use it will not change any time soon but I feel comparing the two is a feeble if not desperate arguement.

Jim_Are_Great

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't think it's enough to learn from our failures. I think we would need to see those structures in place and working for alcohol before we even consider legalising weed.

I heartily agree.

kraggy wrote: »

there are those today smoking cannabis who would undoubtedly smoke more if it were a legal substance.

I have no reason to believe that. People can get cannabis when they want, and those that want to, do so. The illigality of the drug isn't preventing anyone from obtaining it. The problems you have outlined, and which I do not contest, are just not aided in any way by the statutory ban on cannabis.

kraggy wrote: »

Thirdly, you say that if it were legalised that it would clean up the drug thus making it safer. I'd slightly agree with this point if it were in relation to mdma or something but cannabis, even when cultivated in a controlled, labratory environment with minimum interference is highly carcinogenic. So the health risk is still there.

I don't mean that it would be a nice healthy treat for all the family. What I mean is that the drug could be sanitized to a much greater and more professional degree than it currently is. Latent health risks would obviously remain, but no more than in, say, cigarettes. With illigitimate street dealing, extraneous substances are often added to the plant, and the plants are often treated with dangerous enhancers. In a state-regulated cannabis outlet, these factors would obviously be negated, making its consumption safer. As a subsidiary point to this, power would be removed from dealers who, as often as not, are empowered in criminal enterprises by the sale of cannabis.

kraggy wrote: »

I can not fathom your last point whatsoever. You reckon that nobody smokes cannabis in sufficiently high quanitities for it to affect their work life?

No, I reckon that the stoner dystopia you envisage is exaggerative. Some people currently smoke too much to go to work, as you have admitted. Has this ever lead to economic catastrophe? No. If cannabis were legalised, would enough people smoke so much that they can't work? No. Again, you fail to explain the economic prowess of countries in which cannabis is legal.

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

Why make another scourge on society freely available. Any detterent is a good one however strong it is.

No, that is siply untrue. What we need is an effective method of curbing the adverse social effects of cannabis. We do not need an ineffective system which operates in half measures. The system of regulation we have has failed, and what I am suggesting is a new one, one which I feel will combat social ills far better than our current system. If you can show me why the status quo should be maintained despite its obvious shortcomings, then I would be delighted. Otherwise, let's have effective rules.

cavedave

DeVore
If you want to attack genuinely dangerous drugs such as heroin and crack/cocaine then you need to kill the supply, not the demand.

If you remove the cash crop (quite literally!) you cut the dealers off from their revenue. If you cut off their money, then you greatly reduce the upside of being a dealer.

DeV.

Do you have any evidence for this? The evidence I have against this are
1. The study previously mentioned where heroin had a 400 times mark up. The economics of this means you will have difficulty stopping it being sold.
2. The only countries that have stopped opium being grown illegally have just swapped over tho having it grown legally.

Irishcrx

I donm't think the arguement that "Oh i've seen my mates or so and so ruin his life by it " washes anymore how many people have you seen ruin it on "Alcohol" and end up drinking themself into a grave yet we promote this drug and use it as part of our social lifes evry weekend. What medical use has ever been raised for drinking alcohol or smoking cigaretts?None. Cannabis?Plenty of medical uses that's what it's legal for medical patients in Holland, Canada and 6 states in America at the moment and growing everyday. I smoke, I don't drink alot don't like it seen too many people in my family ruin their lives from it, sure pot can be dangerous but not as dangerous if you are a waster anyone then your going to be regardless of pot, plenty of lazy people drink and smoke aswell, it's a sterotype which in this day and age is just no longer true. I smoke cannabis pretty much daily, I also have a well paid job, my own house, my own car, a great gf and penty of friends, I am not lazy I still get everything done and in the evening sit down and have a social smoke with friends. I don't like going to back alley dodgy scumbags to buy weed that aint worth the money, If we legilized we could regulate and take the foundation out of small time drug dealing. I wish to god people would see sence regardless of there personal opinion on it.

Ri na hEireann

Jim_Are_Great wrote: »

I heartily agree.


I have no reason to believe that. People can get cannabis when they want, and those that want to, do so. The illigality of the drug isn't preventing anyone from obtaining it. The problems you have outlined, and which I do not contest, are just not aided in any way by the statutory ban on cannabis.


I don't mean that it would be a nice healthy treat for all the family. What I mean is that the drug could be sanitized to a much greater and more professional degree than it currently is. Latent health risks would obviously remain, but no more than in, say, cigarettes. With illigitimate street dealing, extraneous substances are often added to the plant, and the plants are often treated with dangerous enhancers. In a state-regulated cannabis outlet, these factors would obviously be negated, making its consumption safer. As a subsidiary point to this, power would be removed from dealers who, as often as not, are empowered in criminal enterprises by the sale of cannabis.


No, I reckon that the stoner dystopia you envisage is exaggerative. Some people currently smoke too much to go to work, as you have admitted. Has this ever lead to economic catastrophe? No. If cannabis were legalised, would enough people smoke so much that they can't work? No. Again, you fail to explain the economic prowess of countries in which cannabis is legal.


No, that is siply untrue. What we need is an effective method of curbing the adverse social effects of cannabis. We do not need an ineffective system which operates in half measures. The system of regulation we have has failed, and what I am suggesting is a new one, one which I feel will combat social ills far better than our current system. If you can show me why the status quo should be maintained despite its obvious shortcomings, then I would be delighted. Otherwise, let's have effective rules.

No the arguement still remains. Why add another drug which is accepted as damaging enter the forum of social acceptability from a legal perspective?

I cannot accept any arguement for the legalising of cannabis on the grounds of it being harmless. Again,I can only speak from a personal point of view and I'm sure it must somehow be relevant to you as I'm also from Waterford, but the majority of people I know who smoke the drug do so in far more than a social capacity. It has become part of their being and personality. They are no doubt dependent on the drug and it occupies their thoughts alot more than it should.
Then apart form the obvious mental affects, cannabis acts as a gateway drug to other more serious drugs. To say any different would be just plainly wrong. When cannabis has served its purpose for "chilling and relaxing" and combatting boredom, a new substance is looked for get the excitement.

I don't buy the idea that just because enforcement and detection is failing that we should just legalise something. Violent crime isn't always detected,or on ocassions sometimes not acted upon by the authorities how it shoud be. So does this mean we legalise assault? Does this mean we leagalise prostitution? Where does it stop? What happens if Heroine becomes the replacement of cannabis if legalised? Personally I think there are way too many what ifs to contemplate the legalisation of another damaging vice for Irish society.

If anything should be done it should be a campaign to show cannabis for what it really is,show the health affects and demonise it rather than legalise it.

Freedom of choice has to have some limitations. People by their nature make all sorts of poor decisions and to allow another drug to be easily availabe is just, in my opinion , an uneducated desire from discontented pot smokers.

Jim_Are_Great

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

No the arguement still remains. Why add another drug which is accepted as damaging enter the forum of social acceptability from a legal perspective?

Because it would be far less damaging as a legal, and therefore easily controllable, substance. I have yet to see an argument to persuade me to the contrary.

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

I cannot accept any arguement for the legalising of cannabis on the grounds of it being harmless.

And rightly so. I don't think anyone is suggesting that cannabis is harmless. But, at the risk of becoming repetative, it is far more harmful in every capacity as an underground substance.

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

Then apart form the obvious mental affects, cannabis acts as a gateway drug to other more serious drugs. To say any different would be just plainly wrong. When cannabis has served its purpose for "chilling and relaxing" and combatting boredom, a new substance is looked for get the excitement.

An apocryphal statement at best. This whole argument has been proceeding without anyone pointing out an important lacuna: no objective and comprehensive analysis has been conducted in this jurisdiction investigating the exact medical properties of cannabis use. In the absence of such a study, speculative evidence is all we can rely on. Need I point out that the partial legalisation of cannabis for this investigative purpose would be of obvious benefit. If a conclusive, peer-reviewed survey of the drug is conducted, and it turns out that it is monstrously destructive or inherently addictive, then I'll be the first to change my views. But no such empirical data exists, and so we have no reason to believe that either of these things are true.

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

I don't buy the idea that just because enforcement and detection is failing that we should just legalise something. Violent crime isn't always detected,or on ocassions sometimes not acted upon by the authorities how it shoud be. So does this mean we legalise assault? Does this mean we leagalise prostitution? Where does it stop?

I don't think you're fully comprehending my argument. I'm not suggesting immediate and laissez-faire legalisation. I'm proposing a system which would tackle the problems related to cannabis more effectively than the system on which we have been relying. This is not tantamount to legalising assault or prostitution; there is no alternative system proposed for these offences, and I feel the existing safeguards are effective, if not imperfect. If somebody can suggest a better system for handling these crimes through a path of legalisation, then start a thread and we'll have a chat about it.

Ri na hEireann wrote: »

to allow another drug to be easily availabe is just, in my opinion , an uneducated desire from discontented pot smokers.

I don't appreciate that pejorative remark. I'd like this discussion to continue with the same cordiality with which it began.

Irishcrx

"I have no reason to believe that. People can get cannabis when they want, and those that want to, do so. The illigality of the drug isn't preventing anyone from obtaining it"

Yes, it can be obtained but the majority of it is crap which does you more harm because of it contamination than anything. If it were to be regulated and controled it would stop this and give people a more open choice and most importantly not force MEDICAL USERS having to buy from druglords high money for grit. I'm sure if any of you had to expierience pain and have nothing to cure it that won't knock you for six or cause you sever side effects you would re-think your opinion on the use of medical and social marijuana.

905

Irishcrx wrote: »

What medical use has ever been raised for drinking alcohol or smoking cigaretts?None. Cannabis?Plenty of medical uses that's what it's legal for medical patients in Holland, Canada and 6 states in America at the moment and growing everyday.

In moderation, alcohol consumption has significant health benefits. These include a lower risk of heart attack,[5] lower risk of diabetes,[6] lower risk of Alzheimer's disease,[7] reduced risk of stroke,[8] and an increase in overall longevity.[9] One study found that a person fifty-five or older who consumed 1-3 drinks daily was half as likely to develop dementia linked to poor oxygen to the brain as a person who did not. Additionally, because alcohol increases 'good' cholesterol and decreases the 'bad' cholesterol, there are indications that frequent doses in moderation reduce the risk of blood clots and stroke. These benefits are all counteracted by excessive consumption.[10]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_beverage#Alcohol_consumption_and_health

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_and_health#Beneficial_effects_of_smoking

Irishcrx

Although that article may be true it is not practicle, yes having a pint of guiness may have benefits but the 20 you have after that on a fri/sat night won't be as much will they, you wouldn't go to a doctor with cancer or artritus and have him hand you a pint and a smoke to "Help" no you wouldn't, alcohol at the end of the day like alot of hard drugs are tampered with and mixed by man , cannabis has been used for 4000 years as medical and the 100 or so years it's been illegal is nothing, just cause this society doesn't seem to have a clue whats legal and what's not. Read this article below.

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

905

Just to pedantic, cannabis is 'believed' to have been used for four thousand years, according to the BBC link provided by wiki. It doesn't say how long it's been used as medicine, it does say 'thousands of years'.

Irishcrx

Since it grows wild and has been around pretty much forever sence would show that it has, down to the leaves been used to heal wounds in the battle days. Still 100 years of being illegal isn't a blip on the scale of how long it was used for good, it's sad that it's now classed a drug and in the hands of druglords. I also beleave the government know it would be the right thing to do in legalizing but lets be honest here they won't because it will take away from the drugs industry and they gain too much money from that every year, they don't REALLY want to emiminate it just be seen to be. Gangsters the whole lot of them.

905

I really don't see what the drugs industry has to do with this. If cannabis was legal then they would market it.

Irishcrx

Yeah they would, but to do that they have to admit they were wrong about it this whole time and people would come looking for fines they had to pay back etc, so for start it's hassle as well as that alot of people in the drugs industry probably all of them are totally against this, they make alot of money not only here but in the U.S and UK from cannabis if that is legal that's gone, and so is a large part of the money it generated which was put back into the governement through the form of cover companies, houses, cars etc. It's all a game to them, it's just that nobody see's it cause there simply told drugs are bad and the government will stamp them out it's all crap. Don't get me wrong I would love to see it regulated but what i've outlines above is the real reason it won't be mark my words.