Blind man asks to be charged with cannabis possession to challenge law

The_Captain · 24-01-2014 03:56PM

F**k him, lock him up for being a contrarian dick

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 24-01-2014 03:56PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The man wants to challenge the law, let him challenge the law. His background and life choices shouldn't come into it. Your issue seems to be the way he's using free legal aid. Plenty of other people use free legal aid for far worse causes imo.
This man has a point after all, hence why the drug has been legalised in many places across the world. I don't use it myself but if it's been used to treat certain medical problems then it should be legal for therapeutic use like in many places.

That is one of my issues. The second one is that he's not qualified.

crybaby · 24-01-2014 03:56PM

humanji wrote: »

You're 100% right. We should keep cannabis illegal and make all those things illegal too.

I would miss kit kats more than vodka to be honest.

drunkmonkey · 24-01-2014 03:56PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I just think if there's to be a proper challenge to the law then you need the right experts to give their evidence, based on years of study and experience, and not be letting anybody walk in off the street and giving it a bash.

Ming did and got laughed out of it. It's not going to change from the Top down so this guy is correct to chip away from the bottom, i'll be with him the day I retire, i'll use my state pension just like he's using his disability.

mikom · 24-01-2014 03:57PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

That is one of my issues. The second one is that he's not qualified.

While he is up in court you can get him to ask the judge about this legal challenge for your good self.............

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

Litter pollution act 1997

Quick question. I know that when I'm taking my dog for a walk, and she does her doggy business on the path I have to clean it up or I could be fined.

I'm just wondering, what happens if a guide dog poos? Surely their owners can't get fined, it'd be a bad joke expecting them to clean it up.

frag420 · 24-01-2014 03:57PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I'm not against legalization of cannabis, either for medicinal or recreational use. I do think people should be free to choose.

I just think if there's to be a proper challenge to the law then you need the right experts to give their evidence, based on years of study and experience, and not be letting anybody walk in off the street and giving it a bash.

This was attempted all ready by Luke Flanagan MP who cited peer reviewed studies on the benefits of weed, reviews that debunked every single argument put forward by those MP's that are against it!! We have had experts, people who were against it and changed their minds after seeing that there are benefits to weed. Look at the website of NORML Ireland for some good reads on this.........

J_E · 24-01-2014 03:58PM

The_Captain wrote: »

F**k him, lock him up for being a contrarian dick

--> Lynch mob is over in that thread!

mikom · 24-01-2014 03:59PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Thank you.

Even I didn't know it was that widespread, chances of our nanny state even entertaining the idea are slim because we're already 50 odd years behind everyone else anyway.

Even in the deep south of the US things are changing...........

62% of Georgia Voters Support Marijuana Decriminalization

January 22, 2014
By Sabrina Fendrick, Director of Women's Outreach

Atlanta, GA – A newly released poll found that over half of Georgia voters support a marijuana legalization policy similar to that of Colorado and Washington (54%), however that same report found that even larger majority supports decriminalization. 62% of respondents believe that the state should remove criminal penalties for possession of less than one ounce of pot, and replace it with a $100 civil fine, without the possibility of jail time.

Only 32% were opposed. Interestingly, 56% of seniors, and republicans respectively, were among that nearly two-thirds majority.

The poll, conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP) was commissioned by state affiliates of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, Georgia NORML, and Peachtree NORML. Said Peachtree NORML’s Executive Director Sharon Ravert, “The citizens of Georgia agree, marijuana prohibition is a wasteful and destructive policy. It is time for our state to catch up with public opinion and find a more sensible solution to the status quo.” Peachtree NORML and other advocacy groups are working with lawmakers and various state coalition groups to amend Georgia’s criminal marijuana laws. In 2010, some 32,500 Georgians were arrested for violating marijuana laws, according to the FBI. That is the sixth highest total of any state in America.

Also of note, only 9% of respondents were millennials. This demographic is known to be overwhelmingly supportive of this issue, but their limited representation highlights the fact that there is significant support among other age groups. 71% of those questioned were between the ages of 30 and 65 which suggests that older generations, who are more likely to vote, are also strongly in favor of decriminalization. It’s clear that the widespread support for marijuana law reform in the traditionally conservative state of Georgia has grown to such an extent that it now reaches across all party lines, age groups and races.

“Though it may be surprising to some, these numbers are consistent with a growing trend of support for reform in the southern region of the country,” said Sabrina Fendrick NORML’s Outreach Coordinator for the southeastern region. Recent polls conducted in Louisiana and Oklahoma both show a majority of support (56% and 53% respectively) for a change in the law providing for a $100 fine without jail time for those who possess an ounce or less of marijuana.

Said Fendrick, ”Everywhere you look you will see more and more people dissatisfied with the strict penalties associated with current marijuana laws, and an ever increasing number of southerners are ready for a sensible alternative to existing failed policies, including decriminalization.”
http://cannabis.hawaiinewsdaily.com/2014/01/22/62-of-georgia-voters-support-marijuana-decriminalization/

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 24-01-2014 04:00PM

mikom wrote: »

While he is up in court you can get him to ask the judge about this legal challenge for your good self.............

Good idea. Hum of dog****e round here anyway..

mikom · 24-01-2014 04:00PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

Good idea. Hum of dog****e round here anyway..

Check your shoes.

frag420 · 24-01-2014 04:01PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

Good idea. Hum of dog****e round here anyway..

Then change your clothes then.........

dundalkfc10 · 24-01-2014 04:06PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I'm not against legalization of cannabis, either for medicinal or recreational use. I do think people should be free to choose.

I just think if there's to be a proper challenge to the law then you need the right experts to give their evidence, based on years of study and experience, and not be letting anybody walk in off the street and giving it a bash.

Have a search on the internet, plenty of studies done to confirm cannabis is poretty much harmless

seamus · 24-01-2014 04:11PM

frag420 wrote: »

The grounds on which he is challenging the law is outlined in the article. HE states that by smoking weed it eleviates pain, physical pain.

Pretty sure heroin is good at that too. Better than cannabis, in fact. Why cannabis and not heroin?

That's a rhetorical question, don't answer it. On what basis is, "I am suffering and this alleviates my suffering", grounds to challenge the law?

Perhaps he's taking the case as being in contravention of Art. 5 of the ECHR, and that the illegality of cannabis means that he is unable to treat his condition in a reasonable way, leaving his liberty and security at threat?

Generally there are one of two reasons you make a deliberate challenge to the law:

1. To attempt to prove that the law in question itself is illegal because it conflicts with conventions, rights, etc.
2. To gain a platform to make a point - to show the pointlessness of the law, or whatever - but in the full knowledge that your challenge won't succeed because you have no legal basis on which to mount the challenge.

That's what I'm asking. I agree with legalisation, I just don't see much substance in this challenge. It seems like he's bringing a case to court and his hope is that whatever solicitor is assigned to him, will be able to help him figure out why the law cannot be enforced.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 24-01-2014 04:14PM

I've made my views clear. My own personal opinion is cannabis could and should be legalised, but it's been challenged and it was thrown out.

Letting a wannabe martyr have one last throw of the dice is frankly a waste of time and money.

frag420 · 24-01-2014 04:17PM

seamus wrote: »

Pretty sure heroin is good at that too. Better than cannabis, in fact. Why cannabis and not heroin?

That's a rhetorical question, don't answer it. On what basis is, "I am suffering and this alleviates my suffering", grounds to challenge the law?

Perhaps he's taking the case as being in contravention of Art. 5 of the ECHR, and that the illegality of cannabis means that he is unable to treat his condition in a reasonable way, leaving his liberty and security at threat?

Generally there are one of two reasons you make a deliberate challenge to the law:

1. To attempt to prove that the law in question itself is illegal because it conflicts with conventions, rights, etc.
2. To gain a platform to make a point - to show the pointlessness of the law, or whatever - but in the full knowledge that your challenge won't succeed because you have no legal basis on which to mount the challenge.

That's what I'm asking. I agree with legalisation, I just don't see much substance in this challenge. It seems like he's bringing a case to court and his hope is that whatever solicitor is assigned to him, will be able to help him figure out why the law cannot be enforced.

Oddly enough I was just searching to see if access to pain relief is a human right!! There may not be much substance in the challenge but every little helps with a fight like this. Opinions have to be changed one by one and this will go a long way to helping that cause!!

J_E · 24-01-2014 04:18PM

seamus wrote: »

Pretty sure heroin is good at that too. Better than cannabis, in fact. Why cannabis and not heroin?

Bit of a weak comparison...

mikom · 24-01-2014 04:19PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I've made my views clear. My own personal opinion is cannabis could and should be legalised, but it's been challenged and it was thrown out.

Letting a wannabe martyr have one last throw of the dice is frankly a waste of time and money.

One last throw of the dice?
Yeah............... it'll never be challenged again once this guy fails.
I thought Duracell Bunnies believed in going on and on and on and on........

bajer101 · 24-01-2014 04:19PM

seamus wrote: »

Pretty sure heroin is good at that too. Better than cannabis, in fact. Why cannabis and not heroin?

That's a rhetorical question, don't answer it. On what basis is, "I am suffering and this alleviates my suffering", grounds to challenge the law?

Heroin, aka diamorphine is legally prescribed in many jurisdictions (the UK for example), but not in Ireland. I think the legalising a substance for medicinal use as it alleviates pain is a perfectly valid basis for challenging the law. I personally think that diamorphine should be legalised for use in hospices etc.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 24-01-2014 04:20PM

frag420 wrote: »

Oddly enough I was just searching to see if access to pain relief is a human right!! There may not be much substance in the challenge but every little helps with a fight like this. Opinions have to be changed one by one and this will go a long way to helping that cause!!

Now you said it. Would you not rather get behind a challenge with a better chance of succeeding, rather than see this case added to the list of failures?

Seedy Arling · 24-01-2014 04:22PM

Anita B Jaynow wrote: »

Maybe they'll see the error of their ways now!.

Shocking thing to say. Just awful.

sweetie · 24-01-2014 04:23PM

Anyone else see the thread title as 'Blind man asks to be charged with cannab' and expect a thread about some blind dude who ate one of his fingers when he tried to cook his dinner?

J_E · 24-01-2014 04:24PM

bajer101 wrote: »

Heroin, aka diamorphine is legally prescribed in many jurisdictions (the UK for example), but not in Ireland. I think the legalising a substance for medicinal use as it alleviates pain is a perfectly valid basis for challenging the law. I personally think that diamorphine should be legalised for use in hospices etc.

Wouldn't make sense when they have access to the likes of Fentanyl, etc.

ballsymchugh · 24-01-2014 04:26PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

What's the cost to the state?

He's planning on challenging the law using free legal aid. If he doesn't succeed he's charged with possessing cannabis, which if it's first offence is likely to be a small fine.

if it's a civil case then the legal aid isn't free. subsidised though.

frag420 · 24-01-2014 04:28PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

Now you said it. Would you not rather get behind a challenge with a better chance of succeeding, rather than see this case added to the list of failures?

No as there is no other challenge currently. I am not one for just backing something on the basis that it is a strong argument, I back it on the basis that it is morally right and something I believe should be challenged!!

Seedy Arling · 24-01-2014 04:32PM

What pain is this man in and why does he need marijuana to help him?

mikom · 24-01-2014 04:34PM

Seedy Arling wrote: »

What pain is this man in and why does he need marijuana to help him?

Yawnnnnn...

frag420 · 24-01-2014 04:34PM

Seedy Arling wrote: »

What pain is this man in and why does he need marijuana to help him?

Read the article and all will be revealed!!

ScumLord · 24-01-2014 04:37PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I just think if there's to be a proper challenge to the law then you need the right experts to give their evidence, based on years of study and experience, and not be letting anybody walk in off the street and giving it a bash.

It's not really the place of experts to bring forward challenges like this, they wouldn't for a number of reasons. First there would be a load of stigma thrown upon them which could risk their career. It's one thing for them to tell the results of research in court but it's another to put it forward as their opinion. There's nothing stopping this guy from using the experts to make his case.

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

Letting a wannabe martyr have one last throw of the dice is frankly a waste of time and money.

That's your opinion. I think he's bravely risking his own freedom to make this country a better place and I fully support his use of free legal aid. It's better him using it to put a stop to an unjust law than it being used to protect the criminals that selling the drug illegally. If he was successful he'd save the state a fortune in the long run by taking the drug out of the hands of criminals.

Seedy Arling · 24-01-2014 04:38PM

mikom wrote: »

Yawnnnnn...

Lay off the weed man. You're not your usual comedic self. 4/10.

funk-you · 24-01-2014 04:38PM

Duracell Bunny wrote: »

I just think if there's to be a proper challenge to the law then you need the right experts to give their evidence, based on years of study and experience, and not be letting anybody walk in off the street and giving it a bash.

Taking the cannabis side out of the argument for a minute, you seem hung up on the expense of mounting challenges to laws and who does it.

As citizens, we all have the right to challenging the 'lawfulness' of laws and Judicial review. As it should be and it is a great right to have in theory. The practice for this however is that unless you qualify for free legal aid or have quite a lot of money, these rights are not (in practice) exercisable as you can be liable for substantial costs if upheld.

That takes the challenging of these things out of the hands (again, in practice) of the ordinary guy on the street. So I can see where he's coming from in trying to challenge a law when he see's what he thinks is a realistic opportunity to do it without being hit with a crippling bill you can't pay.

Yes, wasting money is generally bad but I would much rather it was used (or wasted depending on how you see it) for people of exercise rights as citizens when they see laws or practices they see as unfair or unjust.

You should never be afraid of challenging laws you are expected live by. Especially not because the cost is out of reach to do it. That's what you (supposedly) pay your taxes for.

-Funk

Blind man asks to be charged with cannabis possession to challenge law

Comments