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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Legalising RECREATIONAL cannabis

13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Django99


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    Last time Iwas in a Dutch coffee shop.there were plenty of young Dutch cannabis smokers. The idea that smokers are "rapidly aging" is a fallacy.

    He said the herion addicts are rapidly aging not the cannabis smokers.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 732 ✭✭✭DontThankMe


    I don't believe in addiction. People smoke it because they want to. People stop smoking it all the time. Addiction is a fantasy.

    You might not believe that addiction is real but there are millions of people all over the world addicted to different drugs. In your mind addiction is a fantasy but in the real world it is not a fantasy it is a reality for millions of people.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,693 ✭✭✭✭Witcher


    Keep it illegal with a blind eye to be turned
    I fecking voted wrong,decriminalise or fully legalise it was my choice, it's not my bag personally but there's worse things out there.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,276 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    Legalise away mad. Bring back hippy communes and put the old VW Camper van back into production as well. We'd all have a much better life if people would only chill the f*ck out


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,349 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    dfeo wrote: »
    Having read much of the thread on the legality of medicinal cannabis, I've been thinking what the opinion of Irish people as a whole might be on the legalisation of cannabis for recreational purposes.

    I am not sure a boards.ie poll will help you get that answer though as the demography here does generally fall into the camp that would agree with you and I that the right move is full regulated legalization on a level akin to alcohol.
    If I had to vote, I'd vote keeping it illegal. It isn't harmless.

    What IS "harmless" though? A lot of the things we currently have legal are not harmless. So clearly "harmless" alone is not enough of a turning point upon which to mediate the issue. From Gambling, through fast food, up to alcohol..... our society is replete with entirely legal things that are far from being entirely harmless.

    But lest I be accused of simply falling into the "Yea, but what about alcohol?" group..... let us take your "isn't harmless" comment from the complete OPPOSITE side too. KEEPING it illegal is not "harmless" either. The world is a little more complex than "X is not harmless but banning it is". Establishing and maintaining a law against something like this comes with costs, ramification and implications that are THEMSELVES not "harmless".

    So if "it is not harmless" is your sole criteria, it is worth noting that keeping it illegal ALSO has to have that self-same criteria applied. Unless one wishes to be open to accusations of bias that is, then one has to apply such criteria universally, not selectively.
    I know someone who had a cannibas once, they died

    I know someone who had peanuts once. They died. Which serves little other than to show just how useless GENERALLY single anecdotes can be, from people who SUPPORT legalization OR those against it.
    prinzeugen wrote: »
    +1. The head shop on Capel St was burnt down because it was eating into the scumbag druglords profits. What do you think would happen to cannabis cafes etc??

    That is an open question. But I think what would happen would not be the same, because the attack of a criminal underworld on a SINGLE site..... would by definition have to be entirely different from how they would have to respond to an entire INDUSTRY. Especially a legal and regulated product that is disseminated over an already existing infrastructure such as how alcohol and cigarettes are currently sold in locations that sell other things.... news agents, pubs, super markets, and so forth.

    In short: I do not think you can validly draw ANY parallel between the two here at all in anything that is going to approach coherence.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,349 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    The other creep who responded wasn't interested in discussing anything and resorted to childlike insults.

    I trust therefore that you will find my post to be the EXACT opposite and you will respond to it in kind in a mature way and an interest in discussion. Let us see how that plays out shall we? As it would be somewhat disappointing to see you admonish others in this way, and then duck and dodge open discussion behind some mundane cop out or avoidance ploy.
    It's simply not an argument to say that because A is legal B should also be legal.

    I agree, in isolation, it is not. But it DOES establish a baseline for discussion, a context against which arguments can be measured, and a sanity line along which claims about how reality would change might be gauged.

    So as I said to the user above, I would not myself like to land in the simplistic "Well what about alcohol" camp of people who invest the bare minimum of thought into the subject..... but I would not jump to the other extreme of that continuum instead and wholly rubbish such comparisons, or the utility of them.
    Finally, I would plead with people to think seriously about this issue. Don't support it just because it's currently fashionable to so, or because Philly McMahon says it's a good thing. Think for yourself.

    I do, and the convincing arguments I have been presented as to the long term utility of maintaining a law against this drug number somewhere between zero and none. And since one of my core axioms on ANY issue is "Innocent until proven guilty" this by necessity leads me to a stance of pro-legalization with regulation standards akin to those we see in industries like alcohol, but hopefully better than we see in industries like Tobacco.
    No, because it's wrong to smoke drugs

    Alas you have admonished others to think deeper on the issue, but what you have offered right here is little more than a moral assertion. Substance actually backing up that moral call however you have not offered.

    And that is certainly not representative of the level of discourse you not a handful of posts before admonished OTHERS to engage in. It would actually be more representative of what you described as "vapid diatribe" and " carnival of inanity".
    and it should be discouraged by a government interested in keeping law and order.

    See above, same thing.
    I'm not sure what evidence you're talking about, but widespread legalization could easily increase the number of people using the drug.

    It might be worth noticing a slight drift of the goal posts here however. The post you are specifically replying to here CLEARLY reffered to legalization resulting in an "increase the number of people 'who smoke's himself into dullness and laziness' an might I add inject or snort themselves also".

    In your response you diluted this to an "increase the number of people using the drug." which is a much more dilute and general claim than the one you were actually questioning. The is a CHASM of difference between claiming there would be no significant increase in use, and no significant increase in the degree of use as to lead to extreme detriment or addiction issues.

    So if we are admonishing each other, as you have done, on increasing the standard of our discourse.... it might be better achieved by not being seen to make subtle little moves of this sort? Leading by example and all that?
    One of the most lucrative illegal markets is illicit cigarettes. Last time I checked cigarettes were legal.

    For this comment to be of any use we need quite a bit more substance to it.

    Firstly, do we have any figures on what exactly that trade is worth? I certainly do not, but my subjective and anecdotal experience is that 20 years ago there was MANY people selling illegal cigarettes, usually concentrated in the area of Dubiln's Mary and Henry street. But TODAY I can not find a single person selling them. Where are they? What are the figures exactly?

    Secondly, to make any use of your comment we would need to compare the illegal sales figures with some established, or usefully extrapolated figures, on what the figures would be WERE cigarettes illegal. In other words merely saying "They are legal, but look at the illegal trade" has no utility in isolation from consideration of those figures relatives to what they would be otherwise.

    Third, I think the cigarette industry is broken in their regulation and is a poor comparison. People generally seem happy to buy legal and regulated products...... and even pay MORE for them........ when they are assured that the product is ethically sourced and the industry standards ensure some level of quality. And done right that is exactly what a legal cannabis would offer us. But to my (admittedly VERY limited) knowledge this is not ideal with cigarettes and that industry is allowed cut ingredients into their product that are specifically habit forming and not entirely necessary to even be there.

    There are other issues with your comment too, another three that I can think of quickly but probably more, but the two above are relatively so large that they render extension of the list moot for now.
    Yes there are, and they should be punished severely for engaging in suh irresponsible behaviour. Unfortunately, our dead criminal justice isn't interested in protecting law-abiding citizens.

    I would be interested to know how a regulated and legal industry could help us there. One of the possible issues is that Cops on the roadside find it harder to detect cannabis use than they can alcohol. I wonder if science can ever afford us the possibility to "cut in" some other chemical into a regulated product that could highlight use better in some detectable, and legally process-able, way. That would be useful.

    Of course this instantly gives us the argument of "Well would that not drive people towards illegal version of the product that does not have this 'gotcha' cut into it" and that is a valid point, but I wonder how valid and how prevalent that would be.

    Quite often people do not SET OUT to drink drive for example. Some do, and some do not care. But many, maybe even by far MOST people go out with good intentions, and alcohol acts as a moral modifier and they end up doing the unthinkable.

    So actively seeking out an illegal version of the product to avoid detection would, I suspect, imply a level of pre-meditation that I do not think is there on average.

    Just thinking out loud there really, rather than specifically addressing or rebutting your point. But certainly a legal and regulated industry would be one tool in forcing the hand of those too lazy to be "interested in protecting law-abiding citizens". So if that truly is a concern for you, such a tool would be of use to you.
    Just like they do with drink driving. Do you think people should be allowed drink and drive??

    That is a not at all subtle bait and switch move there. No one here is saying that people should be allowed drink and drive. They ARE saying that they should be allowed drink alcohol however.

    Similarly saying that people should be allowed purchase a legal and regulated cannabis product is NOT analogous to drink driving laws.
    From my experience many people support legalization because it is fashionable to do so. Don't underestimate the power of fashion.

    From my experience many people dodge dealing with the substance of the arguments of others by dismissing it in some trivial way such as suggesting that their arguments are "just fashionable". I would certainly advise not doing that, should you find yourself tempted. And I would strongly suggest you will find not a WORD of what I wrote to you in this post will fall prey to that accusation at all, should you feel at any time tempted to make it.
    It's not criminals that cause widespread drug use; it's the people who take the drugs.

    To a point yes, but the distinction is also clear between illegal drugs and legal ones in that Pubs and Newsagents are not actively bringing product into certain locations (like schools) and pushing them with a mix of hard sell and psychological manipulation in order to promote sales.

    So your statement here is not..... false.... by any means but it is certainly an incomplete picture of reality.
    "Addiction" and "alcoholism" are complete myths that deny human will power.

    I do not think they are myths OR that they deny will power. What I think is that they are very real and they serve to UNDERMINE human will power. No one is denying human will power is there, but it would be equally foolish to deny the effects of such addictions upon it.
    1. It is not arbitrary. I think it is wrong to take drugs for many reasons, not least the fact that it harms those close to the user.

    No drug use does no such thing. EXCESSIVE drug use does. But so does EXCESSIVE anything use. You are taking the extreme actions of statistical outliers here and extrapolating a generalization of the majority. Which is not a good move and even risks accusations of your being shrill.
    I'm sorry but how are you calculating harm exactly? Who is speaking for the parent who has to put up with stoned children?

    What have children got to do with it? I would strongly assume that any legal and regulated product would come with all the same age limitations as similar products. If your children are coming home under some form of intoxication then there are issues OTHER than the product itself that are at play there.

    Indicting one with the other is another move belying a level of biased shrillness that is not likely to come across well to a reader. I would actually be tempted to call it a highly dishonest move but let us temper ourselves and merely call it a weak one.
    Smoking weed in moderation is not harmless. And from my experience very few people smoke it in moderation.

    The latter sentence can be dismissed on the face of it, as anecdote is not evidence, especially unverifiable anecdote. And any such anecdote would not be indicative of smoker in general, but smokers that are in YOUR personal circles. In other words...... it would be more a measure of the people YOU associate(d) with rather than any general measure of the issue itself or people within it.

    The first sentence however is floating assertion with no substance yet, so we could perhaps call upon you to flesh it out. Especially given you asked someone else "How are you measuring harm" without showing how you yourself do.

    So at best the only thing achieved by your entire post that time was to invite more discussion, which I hope you can not present.
    Please define addiction. This word is thrown around and taken as a given by almost everyone. What does it mean exactly?

    That depends on context. There are a few official definitions that differ depending on what the source, and causes of the addiction are, and what it is that specifically the person is addicted to.

    If I had to offer my own definition of addiction that somehow unites some other definitions I have seen, but without getting too contextually specific.... I would say addiction is the result from a relatively excessive or prolonged use of a thing (relative to some agreed moderate use of that particular thing) that leads to some physiological or psychological modification of the person that results in undermining that persons ability to mediate their use of the thing by will power alone.

    Why, what would YOUR definition of it be?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Legalise it. Its no worse than alcohol, and bringing it out into the open will help create jobs and generate taxes for the government.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 249 ✭✭Galway_Old_Man


    Legalise and tax it. Beef up education on the dangers of it and put to bed the ridiculous notion of it being harmless.


  • Registered Users Posts: 369 ✭✭Vinculus


    Legalise it and put an end to these boring threads.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Please define addiction.
    http://www.asam.org/quality-practice/definition-of-addiction
    "There is growing evidence that people with serious mental illness, including depression and psychosis, are more likely to use cannabis or have used it for long periods of time in the past. Regular use of the drug has appeared to double the risk of developing a psychotic episode or long-term schizophrenia. However, does cannabis cause depression and schizophrenia or do people with these disorders use it as a medication?

    Over the past few years, research has strongly suggested that there is a clear link between early cannabis use and later mental health problems in those with a genetic vulnerability - and that there is a particular issue with the use of cannabis by adolescents." - Royal College of Psychiatrists

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/314222.php
    Yeah, that's all true. But people with preexisting or familial mental health conditions there's only so much the state can do to protect them, for the most part their health is their own responsibility. It's not like we ban milk because some people have lactose or nut intolerances.

    For a healthy adult they'll only suffer harmful side effects with prolonged chronic abuse and even then I've met plenty of 60+ stoners that are just fine.


    When it comes to legalising it for sale to the public we can put effort into making a market that protects users. We won't just lift the ban and let people at it. Smoking in public and in coffeeshops will be out because we already have the smoking ban, the anti smoker lobby could even use legalised cannabis as a reason to push more extensive smoking bans in public places, if not a complete ban on smoking in public..

    I would say that we do need some social outlet for using cannabis, it needs it's version of the pub. Restaurants should be able to apply for a license to serve cannabis edibles.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 7,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Yakult


    The polls don't lie, here and elsewhere, its ****ing time we start pushing for some legalization.. Am sick to death of it now, circles and circles I feel. Most people are for the legalization, so maybe they should give the people what we want. It's working fine for other countries, in fact, bringing huge amounts of revenues to the government, creating jobs, preventing good persons from receiving a criminal conviction for something safer than cigarettes.

    That's without even mentioning the great resource of hemp. Don't know about it? Then google it.

    Its 2017, plenty of research has been done and continues to be done, like ANYTHING we consume, caffeine, alcohol, trans-fats, carbs etc. etc. etc. if you abuse it, expect consequences.

    I just can't see any reason why this would still be illegal in this day and age, its ridiculous.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    Yakult wrote: »
    The polls don't lie, here and elsewhere, its ****ing time we start pushing for some legalization.. Am sick to death of it now, circles and circles I feel. Most people are for the legalization, so maybe they should give the people what we want. It's working fine for other countries, in fact, bringing huge amounts of revenues to the government, creating jobs, preventing good persons from receiving a criminal conviction for something safer than cigarettes.

    That's without even mentioning the great resource of hemp. Don't know about it? Then google it.

    Its 2017, plenty of research has been done and continues to be done, like ANYTHING we consume, caffeine, alcohol, trans-fats, carbs etc. etc. etc. if you abuse it, expect consequences.

    I just can't see any reason why this would still be illegal in this day and age, its ridiculous.

    But but but, the mammies of Ireland disagree.. Seamus and Mary introduced to heroin and crack cocaine by this gateway drug, now they have no teeth and live under a bridge in Athlone. Little Tommy took two puffs of a joint now he has schizophrenia. etc etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Yakult wrote: »
    That's without even mentioning the great resource of hemp. Don't know about it? Then google it.
    Ironically, allowing hemp to be grown would make it next to impossible for anyone to grow recreational cannabis anywhere near the hemp. The hemp would pollinate the cannabis making it worthless. Recreational cannabis is basically a female plant bursting at the seams trying to get pollinated. Any indoor grow would need filtered air.

    Hemp is a wonder material though, it can actually replace a lot of oil based products that are currently eating through global oil stocks. We should definitely be growing it here.

    I think it's inevitable that it will all be legalised I'd just love to see Ireland get in there first and get a head start on the industries that would be created.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 7,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭Yakult


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Ironically, allowing hemp to be grown would make it next to impossible for anyone to grow recreational cannabis anywhere near the hemp. The hemp would pollinate the cannabis making it worthless. Recreational cannabis is basically a female plant bursting at the seams trying to get pollinated. Any indoor grow would need filtered air.

    Hemp is a wonder material though, it can actually replace a lot of oil based products that are currently eating through global oil stocks. We should definitely be growing it here.

    I think it's inevitable that it will all be legalised I'd just love to see Ireland get in there first and get a head start on the industries that would be created.

    That is ironic :pac:

    What kind of distance are we talking roughly?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Yakult wrote: »
    That is ironic :pac:

    What kind of distance are we talking roughly?
    I have no idea what the range of pollen would be, but on a windy day it could cover a rather large area.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭learn_more


    I wouldn't vote for anything which would create a situation where one could just go down the shops and buy it, like alcohol.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭pablo128


    learn_more wrote: »
    I wouldn't vote for anything which would create a situation where one could just go down the shops and buy it, like alcohol.

    Well the current situation is where you go down and meet someone at the back of the shops and buy it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭323


    Legalise and tax it, same goes for all other narcotics.


    learn_more wrote: »
    I wouldn't vote for anything which would create a situation where one could just go down the shops and buy it, like alcohol.

    Why not? Alcohol causes many more deaths and much greater social problems than cannabis.

    Cigarettes available in almost every shop, kill many times more (1 in every 2 users), with the government having the greatest vested interest.

    Legalising all would almost completely eliminate the criminal element and do away with much of the crime in the country, particularly Dublin, freeing up massive Garda resources.

    “Follow the trend lines, not the headlines,”



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 552 ✭✭✭Commotion Ocean


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Recreational cannabis is basically a female plant bursting at the seams trying to get pollinated.

    Slutty plant


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    Meddling nanny statists and their big ideas, they never learn. Smoking will always be a thing, even if tobacco is banned entirely. There will always be demand for forbidden fruits, and the black market will meet that demand.

    I suppose you're right really. That 2025 target I believe was driven by Dr James O'Reilly, an ex 40 a day man who lost both his father and brother to cancer. You shouldn't make policy based off raw emotion or personal tragedy.

    I don't want smoking to be banned, it's a personal choice, but obviously it should be discouraged in all forms, especially amongst the younger generations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭learn_more


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Well the current situation is where you go down and meet someone at the back of the shops and buy it.

    Yes, and ?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,299 ✭✭✭spiralism


    I think i can offer a bit of perspective here as i've lived in Holland for the best part of the last three and a half years.

    Crime is lower than Ireland, definitely. Amsterdam is a very safe city by any standards. I'd have far less worries about wandering the streets of Amsterdam at night than i would have about wandering the streets of Dublin.

    Dutch people, and i found this interesting in light of the topic, tend to smoke far less weed than their contemporaries in europe. Most Dutch people I interact with don't smoke weed and have no interest in it. The coffeshop industry makes its money off tourists and expats for the most part.

    On that topic, the city's economy is largely based on tourism and weed tourism contributes some 400 million euros to their economy annually. Coffeeshops are being closed however as they are very strictly regulated (for example almost every shop in the red light district had to close due to being within a quarter of a km from a daycare) and licences are difficult to obtain and rarely granted. In addition, weed is not actually technically legal in holland but "tolerated", with the coffeeshop industry built around it. There have been calls for a move towards full legality quite recently as these laws still leave criminals in the loop as they supply the coffeshops and the shops can be prosecuted for obtaining the stock they are legally permitted to sell. It's a pioneering system that they have here, but far from a perfect one.

    On average, a gram of weed costs between 7-15 euro in a coffeeshop, i can just walk into one and buy it there and then. There are cheaper and dearer strains available but they would typically be at the lower and higher end of quality respectively. In Ireland, depending on where and who you ask, a gram would cost around 20 euros. This may be sprayed or otherwise adulterated, unlike what is served here and taxed. ID is required and minors will not be served and told to leave/refused admission.

    I know several heavy or previously heavy users and all of them are doing fine, it doesn't interfere with their daily lives. Never heard of anyone getting too high and not going to work. Never heard of someone getting too high the night before and missing work. Several of the heaviest smokers i know have held down the same job for some time, have been promoted in their job or are studying in university, some at masters level.

    I work in a hotel dealing with tourists every day of the week and the worst i ever see with weed is some tourist eating a space cake and freaking out a little because the amount they ingested and the strength of it is overwhelming. They feel fine after they drink something sweet and lie down for a bit, it's never even been necessary to seek medical advice. That said, some have tried ringing an ambulance themselves, this is usually met with the irritated dispatcher telling them they're going to be fine and to stop wasting their time.

    Just thought i'd give people a perspective on what it looks like from over here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,398 ✭✭✭StinkyMunkey


    Keep it illegal with a slap on the wrist
    Same old argument "he's allowed to drink and smoke, what can't I have a joint". Then they legalise cannabis, and George now wants cocaine to be legalised. **** it, legalise all drugs, sure they are all responsible adults let them decide for themselves.

    Question? If smoking cigarettes was illegal, how many people would wanna have them legalised?

    Cannabis like most things is ok in moderation, but a lot of people don't do moderation. Binge drinking anyone?

    So you legalise cannabis, now your allowed to puff your brains out, it's not like anyone will drive and smoke it, operate heavy machinery with it, their work be effected by it, that no one will abuse it. Do these things happen, yes, but they are not socially acceptable. So why create easier access and more demand for something that has the potential to cause death or injury in greater numbers?!

    Thing is I agree with it for medicinal purposes. I don't wanna deal with half baked eejits constantly, just like I don't like dealing with drunken eejits.

    If you gonna legalise it, do so on its own merits and stop whinging about "he's allowed to drink and smoke, why cant i smoke weed".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,814 ✭✭✭TPD


    Same old argument "he's allowed to drink and smoke, what can't I have a joint". Then they legalise cannabis, and George now wants cocaine to be legalised. **** it, legalise all drugs, sure they are all responsible adults let them decide for themselves.

    Question? If smoking cigarettes was illegal, how many people would wanna have them legalised?

    Cannabis like most things is ok in moderation, but a lot of people don't do moderation. Binge drinking anyone?

    So you legalise cannabis, now your allowed to puff your brains out, it's not like anyone will drive and smoke it, operate heavy machinery with it, their work be effected by it, that no one will abuse it. Do these things happen, yes, but they are not socially acceptable. So why create easier access and more demand for something that has the potential to cause death or injury in greater numbers?!

    Thing is I agree with it for medicinal purposes. I don't wanna deal with half baked eejits constantly, just like I don't like dealing with drunken eejits.

    If you gonna legalise it, do so on its own merits and stop whinging about "he's allowed to drink and smoke, why cant i smoke weed".

    You're assuming that more people will smoke it if it's legalised, or those already smoking it will smoke more. That's not the case. Take yourself for example - I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say you don't smoke. Would you go out and smoke yourself into a stupor tomorrow if it were legalized today? If you wouldn't, I don't see why you assume so many others would.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Keep it illegal with a slap on the wrist
    So if it is so harmless, why are the Gardai testing for it? And if it is so... ineffective, why use it?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 478 ✭✭jimmy180sx


    Everyone I know who smokes cannabis is a jibber jabber marshmallow head who can't string together two sentences


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,349 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Same old argument "he's allowed to drink and smoke, what can't I have a joint". Then they legalise cannabis, and George now wants cocaine to be legalised. **** it, legalise all drugs, sure they are all responsible adults let them decide for themselves.

    Or, better, we can stop thinking of all of them under the one umberella term "drug" and instead consider each drug on it's own merits and demerits, and see which ones are sensible to have banned, and which ones are not.

    I am not sure a reactionary throwing ones hands in the air and espousing "ban" or "legalize" the lot would really benefit anyone in the long run.
    it's not like anyone will drive and smoke it, operate heavy machinery with it, their work be effected by it, that no one will abuse it. Do these things happen, yes, but they are not socially acceptable. So why create easier access and more demand for something that has the potential to cause death or injury in greater number

    And a legal over the counter version of it is not likely to make doing those things any more socially acceptable than they are not already. So it is quite difficult to discern what you think your point is.
    Thing is I agree with it for medicinal purposes. I don't wanna deal with half baked eejits constantly, just like I don't like dealing with drunken eejits.

    I wonder though if when deciding on society level issues, whether "what I want to deal with" displays any real depth of thinking on the issue. Few of us want to have to deal with intoxicated mental impairment in our day to day...... but is that really a valid basis upon which to mediate what should be legal and illegal? You are suggesting a Nanny State approach to personal social ethics at that stage.
    jimmy180sx wrote: »
    Everyone I know who smokes cannabis is a jibber jabber marshmallow head who can't string together two sentences

    Which is, one should hastily point out, a measure of the kind of people YOU have in YOUR circles..... and not a measure of Cannabis users in general. If everyone YOU know acts in a certain way then the common denominator there is YOU.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    jimmy180sx wrote: »
    Everyone I know who smokes cannabis is a jibber jabber marshmallow head who can't string together two sentences

    Aye that Sagan fellow was a complete dunce.

    Pffft. Flat land!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Graces7 wrote: »
    So if it is so harmless, why are the Gardai testing for it? And if it is so... ineffective, why use it?
    Cannabis is currently illegal, Gardai are upholding the law. Change the law and gardai won't test for it. Nobody said cannabis was ineffective. We're saying it's not harmful enough to be made illegal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Cannabis is currently illegal, Gardai are upholding the law. Change the law and gardai won't test for it. Nobody said cannabis was ineffective. We're saying it's not harmful enough to be made illegal.

    Shur anyone can get a lamp for less than 100 quid and grow it in a wardrobe. Or out in the garden during the summer. There is no logic to criminalising people for having in their possession a plant, or parts of a plant that is relatively easy to grow. I think the pharma industry and their lobbies have a big hand in keeping it illegal. Bad for business.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Shur anyone can get a lamp for less than 100 quid and grow it in a wardrobe. Or out in the garden during the summer. There is no logic to criminalising people for having in their possession a plant, or parts of a plant that is relatively easy to grow. I think the pharma industry and their lobbies have a big hand in keeping it illegal. Bad for business.
    I think drugs are an easy target for politicians and gardai top brass. They don't want to change the law.

    Imagine if drugs were legalised, what would the gardai and politicians have to hide behind. Thieving could move up the ladder, if you're robbed these days everyone just accepts it and moves on like it's just a part of life.

    Right now the gardai can just raid the people they know deal drugs whenever they need to show results, the politicians can blame drugs for social problems rather than actually do something about it themselves.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    ScumLord wrote: »
    I think drugs are an easy target for politicians and gardai top brass. They don't want to change the law.

    Imagine if drugs were legalised, what would the gardai and politicians have to hide behind. Thieving could move up the ladder, if you're robbed these days everyone just accepts it and moves on like it's just a part of life.

    Right now the gardai can just raid the people they know deal drugs whenever they need to show results, the politicians can blame drugs for social problems rather than actually do something about it themselves.

    You're right, spot on, it also keeps their drug seizure figures way up. Take cannabis out of the equation and the seizure figures wouldn't look so great, they couldn't pat themselves on the back, it's a case of - ''look here, we're doing stuff', drugs bad, we found drugs''. I dread to think of all the resources wasted busting cannabis grows. There was a case recently in Limerick where a couple of fellas in their late 50s (one was actually a farmer) were surveilled for months on end before the ''big bust'' was made. Night vision cameras, hiding in hedges, the works. 150 or so plants at the end of the day.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Graces7 wrote: »
    So if it is so harmless, why are the Gardai testing for it? And if it is so... ineffective, why use it?

    I have read through most of this thread and your posts stand out the most and by far.

    You seem to have a habit of overusing logical fallacies. They are everywhere. There's little logic to your comments, just fear and that one anecdote. Why are you so blind to reason?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,398 ✭✭✭StinkyMunkey


    Keep it illegal with a slap on the wrist
    TPD wrote: »
    You're assuming that more people will smoke it if it's legalised, or those already smoking it will smoke more. That's not the case. Take yourself for example - I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say you don't smoke. Would you go out and smoke yourself into a stupor tomorrow if it were legalized today? If you wouldn't, I don't see why you assume so many others would.

    No I don't smoke weed but I've tried it. I've found I don't like things that alter my perception, that includes getting blotter drunk. People who already smoke weed may smoke more with easy access, but in the grand scheme of things not that much more. Saying something that is easy to acquire and legal won't create more users or demand is extremely naive, guns in the US anyone, point being that if it's easily available and legal it will generate more demand. That's economics, cheaper and ease of access create demand. I don't think Ireland will become a country of stoners over night, but I've seen first hand the abuse of cannabis. If cannabis was legal I'd expect a huge tax on it, anything else would be foolish. Making cannabis won't stop criminals still selling it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,349 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    No I don't smoke weed but I've tried it. I've found I don't like things that alter my perception, that includes getting blotter drunk. People who already smoke weed may smoke more with easy access, but in the grand scheme of things not that much more.

    That's your choice. I don't either. Used to for a couple of years a long time ago.
    Saying something that is easy to acquire and legal won't create more users or demand is extremely naive, guns in the US anyone, point being that if it's easily available and legal it will generate more demand. That's economics, cheaper and ease of access create demand. I don't think Ireland will become a country of stoners over night, but I've seen first hand the abuse of cannabis.

    How do explain the Netherlands? Their relaxed approach to Cannabis hasn't translated into high rates of use. Less weed is smoked there per capita than here.
    If cannabis was legal I'd expect a huge tax on it, anything else would be foolish. Making cannabis won't stop criminals still selling it.

    Criminals only sell it because it's worth their while, easy money. If it was legalised and huge tax were put on it criminals would still sell it because there would still be a profit in it for them. What would be the point of putting huge tax on it? Wouldn't that be foolish?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,067 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    I'm on the fence about the issue to be honest. I'd no issue with it for medical purposes but the more I've seen with people starting taking cannabis and progressing onto other drugs or even staying on cannabis haven't being good.
    So I honestly don't know!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    I'm on the fence about the issue to be honest. I'd no issue with it for medical purposes but the more I've seen with people starting taking cannabis and progressing onto other drugs or even staying on cannabis haven't being good.
    So I honestly don't know!

    Cannabis, the gate way drug... :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,067 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Cannabis, the gate way drug... :rolleyes:

    Just in my experience!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    I live in Seattle, in Washington state, where its been completely legal for two years now. Not decriminalized, not medicinal use, but completely legal (for over 21's!).

    Its highly regulated. Its all produced within Washington state by licensed taxed growers, its tested, packaged and labelled. It is about as regulated as any food.

    The average price for the "flower" is about $10/gram with tax, but varies with the strain. Edibles can cost more, oils, tinctures etc can vary. A typical retail shop could stock fifty different types.

    I'm trying to think of any negatives that have emerged over the few years its been legal. Obviously crime connected to cannabis has almost disappeared completely. I doubt there's any illegal sellers left. I believe i've read that underage use might be up, but not by much because its actually not that much easier for them to get a hold of.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Just in my experience!

    And in your experience, cannabis was the first drug that person or persons took?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,067 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    And in your experience, cannabis was the first drug that person or persons took?

    Yes, I would have always supported cannabis being legalised up until a few years ago. It's just now I'd be uncertain of it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,705 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    And in your experience, cannabis was the first drug that person or persons took?
    Yes, I would have always supported cannabis being legalised up until a few years ago. It's just now I'd be uncertain of it.

    not cigarettes or alcohol?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,067 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Tigger wrote: »
    not cigarettes or alcohol?

    Calpol when they were four. I used always say all the stuff in the media about cannabis was made up but I've experienced it so I don't know who to believe to be honest!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,705 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    Calpol when they were four. I used always day all the stuff in the media about cannabis was made up but I've experienced so I don't know who to believe to be honest!

    thee way i see it is this
    people that want to get cannabis will get it
    those that want to smoke their brains out will
    legal or illegal its not hard to get

    however the only reason i see it as a gateway drug is that someone in the social group has to actually interact with a drug dealer to get the cannabis and they will therefore have developed a contact that allows them to get other drugs

    make it legal and this is removed, a long time ago i was a recreational user but this didn't make me crave/use other narcotics, but i was offered them. Personally i'd legalise everything but i suppose its like seatbelts; there is a point where it becomes important to have rules to protect people from them selves


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭Vincent Vega


    Thing is I agree with it for medicinal purposes. I don't wanna deal with half baked eejits constantly, just like I don't like dealing with drunken eejits.

    I don't really follow this sort of thinking.

    If you agree with its medicinal properties, why not agree that there will also be some who experience psychological benefits from frequently taking it? Specifically those who would benefit from certain strains which help to alleviate anxiety and/or lift their mood.

    Why focus on the negative stereotype of the substance abuser?

    I think a major part of the problem with usage currently, is that a lot of people do not know what they are buying as far as strain or potency go, meaning theres no way to aim for consistency of effect.
    As things stand, smoking a joint or a pipe of the similar measured amount could potentially produce any range of effects from feeling relaxed to complete disassociation.

    Also, when a person settles into a beneficial usage pattern they'll most likely get to the point of running out, and it's back to square one if and when they can get more.

    In any case, people are using it and will continue to.

    I think if you want them to do it responsibly, you need to provide them with the right options to allow for sensible and informed choices to be made.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,256 ✭✭✭FlawedGenius


    Gives you red eyes, dry mouth, just makes u want to be lazy and eat? So why we legalising it again?

    Ban alcohol while were at it will stop drunkin brawls everyone should be buzzed out of it on coffee or coca cola.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,615 ✭✭✭worded


    InTheTrees wrote: »
    I live in Seattle, in Washington state, where its been completely legal for two years now. Not decriminalized, not medicinal use, but completely legal (for over 21's!).

    Its highly regulated. Its all produced within Washington state by licensed taxed growers, its tested, packaged and labelled. It is about as regulated as any food.

    The average price for the "flower" is about $10/gram with tax, but varies with the strain. Edibles can cost more, oils, tinctures etc can vary. A typical retail shop could stock fifty different types.

    I'm trying to think of any negatives that have emerged over the few years its been legal. Obviously crime connected to cannabis has almost disappeared completely. I doubt there's any illegal sellers left. I believe i've read that underage use might be up, but not by much because its actually not that much easier for them to get a hold of.

    I've never canabised but how much was a gram before it was legal ? Did the price drop ?

    I'm picturing a lot of stoners really nervous on budget day here in the future if it gets the go ahead. 2 euro on a Gram of grass effective from midnight ....

    We will all be going up north to get it cheaper ...

    Vote green man

    Grabs popcorn, and some chocolate .... and maybe some biscuits


  • Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I don't smoke and have no interest in doing so in the future but I think it should be legal. Pages and pages of debate are a waste of time.

    No matter what the No side says, you can get it easily anyways so all of your points are moot. Laws should be realistic. Losing the benefits of legalisation while everyone can still get it utterly pointless.

    It makes you lazy.. How does legalisation affect that?
    It's bad for your lungs.. Legalisation will let people vape it.
    People will drive on it.. They already do. Legalisation will put controls and better checks in place.
    More people will smoke it.. Says who and so what.

    Only the Yes Side's arguments have substance because they would bring change. It's undeniable that it would hit crime and boost the tax intake.

    In Holland, surprisingly few Dutch even bother to smoke it. The government famously said they succeeded in making weed boring.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,900 ✭✭✭InTheTrees


    worded wrote: »
    I've never canabised but how much was a gram before it was legal ? Did the price drop ?

    The price has certainly dropped. But its hard to say how much because now you have a huge choice of packaged good quality product that sells from between about $8/gram and $25/gram, and before you had some shady character handing you a baggie of indeterminate strain.

    You can buy "shake" for about $100/oz (28 grams). Shake is the by-product from trimming the buds. Perfectly good for cooking or vaping.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23 ItsJusMe


    Does it?

    Most alcoholics I have known don't need a can to help them get out of bed every morning.

    Most alcos don't need a can on their lunch to get them through the working day.

    Most alcos can manage tasks like going to the shops without needing to down a can first.

    This whole alcohol= evil weed= great stuff is a load of bollocks frankly.

    1 - Most tokers i know don't need a spliff to get them out of bed every morning!

    2 - Most tokers don't need a spliff on there lunch to get them through the working day!

    3 - Most tokers can manage tasks like going to the shops without needing to have a spliff first!

    4 - This whole alcohol= evil weed= great stuff is residing in YOUR TINY Brain and your extremely narrow minded outlook on life!

    You my man, need to get out more and get a grip on what's going on in the REAL world! It's small minded people like you that has this country the way it feckin is today..!!

    Re-legalise Cannabis..
    We are Stoner.


    We go to work everyday.

    We've thought about life more than you can understand.

    We've values that you overlook.

    We are the ones who hold your hair while your poison ejects itself.

    We are the ones who can talk to the cop, since you can't even stand.

    We are prosecuted by those who are jealous of our zeal.

    We don't need help or your opinion, or that new fancy liver.


    We are understanding, compassionate and forgiving. If the laws changed tomorrow,

    we would not hold spite for all the years of harassment.

    We are joyous, happy and outgoing. Not only do we love the greatness we have found

    in life, but feel compelled to share it with you as well.

    We are dependable, chivalrous and loyal. We don't smoke to much pot and

    accidentally screw our best friends girlfriend.


    We are accepting, trusting and doubtless. Ethnicity? Race? Social status?

    Don't worry about all that, sit down and have a toke with us.

    We will not give up. We will survive your trials. We will endure your lies.

    And sooner or later, we will win.

    We are all together. We all accept each other. We are all one.


    We are Stoner.




    Signed: A. Friend


Advertisement