One billion less to gangland crime?

Legalising marijuana would lead to get its own issues though, such as a sudden influx of dreadlocked didgeridoo players and ethnic knitwear merchants.

I used to live in Galway and you can barely recognise the place after it was flooded with monged-up hashheads and smoke stick slavers. Legalising it would only make it worse.

It makes sense to legalize cannabis, but such is the social stigma attached to it by ridiculous false information and scaremongering, it simply won't happen anytime soon.

Oh but by all means drink up, there's no hypocrisy in that whatsoever ever.

The offically line:

Drink = sensibly
Cannabis = causes schizophrenia and paranoia

Ps, The paranoia claim is a genius piece of propoganda because if you tell someone that something is going to make them paranoid then that in itself can cause paranoia!!!.

I think we have enough problems and anti social behaviour and mental health issues without encouraging more. Weed is not harmless. Rather than making the state the drug dealers how about just put resources in to tackling gangland activities?

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

I don't smoke and have never been caught with any, so I'm hoping I don't have a chip on my shoulder about the issue or an agenda, but it seems so clear cut to me what the right thing to do is.

Less ordinarily law abiding citizens getting convictions.
More people use it as an alternative to drink.
Money that now goes to criminals goes instead to taxes.

= Profit

I'm similar to yourself and this is why I agree with you. I don't smoke cannabis or cigarettes myself but I do enjoy drink.

Now I have occasionally smoked cannabis in the past but I never saw the real attraction to it, it's not bad, but you see I'm tired and hungry at the best of times so cannabis wasn't for me :-)

Having smoked cannabis and knowing plenty of people who still regularly smoke it I can't see how it's more harmful than alcohol, in fact speaking from experience the exact opposite is generally the case. Throw in the fact that prohibition doesn't actually stop access to cannabis (all it really does is make drug dealers richer), then surely the best solution to this problem is legalisation and regulation.

Don't hold your breath on Ireland doing this though.

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I think we have enough problems and anti social behaviour and mental health issues without encouraging more. Weed is not harmless. Rather than making the state the drug dealers how about just put resources in to tackling gangland activities?

If you consider legalisation turning the state into a 'drug dealer' then the state is already a drug dealer because alcohol and tobacco are currently available, legal drugs in this country.

I honestly don't know how much you know about cannabis but it's far less likely to cause anti-social behaviour than other drugs or even by people who aren't on drugs. I'd go as far as to say cannabis would be likely to reduce anti-social behaviour given it's relaxing effects!

Putting more resources into tackling gangland isn't likely to work, see America's ridiculous and enormous waste of money know as the 'war on drugs' as an example of this.

A flick of a pen? I hate this simplification. Portugal decriminalised possession. That system is good for tackling the users in a non criminal manner but it doesn't affect the organised crime aspect. The criminals still sell the drugs. But let us say for the sake of argument you just legalise the whole industry. How would it be any different? Criminals would still run it. You'd have to regulate the whole industry, from point of manufacture to point of sale. I'd argue that takes more than simply the flick of a pen.

Even if you did manage to regulate the entire industry, there would still have to be some method of deciding who can buy what. You'd still need to enforce these rules somehow too. Some drugs are dangerous to people. That's why we have a prescription medication system in the country.

I'm just curious how much thought you've put into your flick of a pen idea.

Incidentally, the profit margin on marijuana is pretty small. Ecstasy and cocaine are the big money drugs.

Mesrine65 wrote: »

First of all Lexie let me say that I am appalled at the abuse you suffered & I hope you are in a better place now.

While I understand your views due to your experience, I am inclined to disagree with you to an extent.

I smoke 1gm of cannabis daily & have done so for 30+ years...

I do not suffer from paranoia, it hasn't changed me as a person, I would never ride my motorcycle under the influence & I certainly wouldn't partake of in the company of minors.

Unfortunately not everyone is compatible with cannabis, in the same way as not everyone is compatible with alcohol consumption & basically tolerance is down to the individuals physiology IMHO

Just out of curiosity, how long do you leave between smoking your daily joint and driving that you consider yourself to no longer be under the influence.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There's been objective research on long term regular smoking. You don't have to have smoked with a group of friends for 10 years to know that there are mental side effects.

Like anything, it needs more research.

It does need more research but it can be hard to trust research. I watched a 'balanced' programme on cannabis a while back named Americas Stoned Kids (a ridiculous title to start with, obviously aimed at pulling your heartstrings), it was basically 1 hour full of anti-cannabis propaganda.

At one point the host goes to see a doctor (they showed a good close up of her qualifications just to emphasise her credibility) who had carried out a 38 year study on the effects of cannabis use among teenagers (who shouldn't be taking any drugs anyway). Her 38 year study basically amounted to this = chronic smokers in their teens tended not to do as well as those who weren't chronic smokers. I shít you not, that was the jist of her conclusion and it took 38 fúckin years of research to come to that conclusion, something which anybody with half a brain could have told you in less than 38 seconds!

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Should it be legalized? yes, but it won't magically solve social issues, take a trip to Amsterdam, chock full of dealers/criminals under-cutting official prices

I agree and I'm not suggesting it would magically solve our social issues, also I've been to Amsterdam twice and found it a lovely, safe city.

LexieOnRale wrote: »

That's the thing. Plenty of people can go out, get drunk and not be violent, disturb the peace, cause trouble or damage things. But it does exist and it's a massive drain on emergency services. It does cause problems and people who are pro cannabis always trot out how drinking is worse

Then you have smokers lighting up in cars, kids breathing in second hand smoke and a serious amount of health issues caused by smoking

It is worse and I say that as someone who loves a few drinks and doesn't smoke cannabis at all, or tobacco for that matter. Also obviously people shouldn't smoke anything with children in the car.

LexieOnRale wrote: »

This portrayal that cannabis is harmless is simply not true. Would I like to meet a driver stoned on the road, nope. I Certainly wouldn't live with someone who smokes it constantly because it does make people paranoid, it does change a person. Maybe not to the person who smokes two joints at the weekend but when someone gets up and reaches for a joint before he can even go to work, it's a problem. And we have enough problems with legal drugs without going making more problems for ourselves.

I agree with some of that but I'd ask you to take the emotional side out of it, if you don't like cannabis, fine that's your choice, but why deny responsible smokers?

Anyway I agree that cannabis isn't harmless, I'm no doctor but I doubt any drug is totally harmless. Also people shouldn't drive around stoned and if you need a joint just to get out of the bed in the morning that could very well be a problem, but do these cases represent the majority of smokers, I doubt it.

I disagree that it makes people paranoid and changes a person, I'm sorry to hear your own personal troubles but again that's a sweeping statement, it's doesn't represent all smokers.