Possibly a stupid question but for those medical cases, can't they just put cannabis (cannabinoids?) into pill form and make it into a prescription medication? Unless that's what the article is proposing and I was just too lazy to read it 
Nick Clegg backs campaign calling for medical use of Cannabis
- Thread starter Old Man
- Start date
Wow, just wow...
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2015
- Posts
- 2,634
Ban
Not a chance. They had a debate in parliament in October and despite overwhelmingly positives towards using cannabis medically the government stuck their fingers in their ears and said 'lalalalalalala'.
No government would push it as a main agenda due to peoples misconceptions of it, they wouldnt get elected/re-elected. Maybe in 10 years when there are more informed people outweighing those with the stigma.
I will say that the tobacco/alcohol arguments for legalising cannabis should stop though. If we were to look at legalising them now with the years of data we had available we wouldn't. The government wont illegalise them due to income etc now and because of how engrained they are in society.
No government would push it as a main agenda due to peoples misconceptions of it, they wouldnt get elected/re-elected. Maybe in 10 years when there are more informed people outweighing those with the stigma.
I will say that the tobacco/alcohol arguments for legalising cannabis should stop though. If we were to look at legalising them now with the years of data we had available we wouldn't. The government wont illegalise them due to income etc now and because of how engrained they are in society.
To be honest, I was simply being glib. Riffing on the idea that the government's purported effort to protect its citizens from the horrors of cannabis etc actually incubates an environment where potentially (and often actually) more dangerous 'legal' alternatives are given a market.
What i always find funny is this argument about medical canabis is always trumpeted by people who just want to get high as if they think legitimising it through medical means will help.
Which is nonsense, after all opiates are widley used medicaly you wouldnt use that as an argument in favour of legalising them for recreational use.
Which is nonsense, after all opiates are widley used medicaly you wouldnt use that as an argument in favour of legalising them for recreational use.
Some states in America have legalised cannabis and it's been shown that by legalising it, it frees up the police, who no longer have to make arrests and so they can be used to attend other calls. Taking the drugs out of the hands of the dealers and instead making them freely available is a positive. Nobody's died after smoking a joint have they?
Underlying the drug problem is poverty. Governments need to apply social welfare support that is adequate in order to give people jobs, to earn money, and so on. Sadly the right wingers don't agree and they are doing everything they can to maintain the status quo. We need a little socialism in our democracies.
Underlying the drug problem is poverty. Governments need to apply social welfare support that is adequate in order to give people jobs, to earn money, and so on. Sadly the right wingers don't agree and they are doing everything they can to maintain the status quo. We need a little socialism in our democracies.
True, except some of them are harmful if abused. Wish they would just legalise or decriminalise, some of the scum bags that sell it out there need to be put out of business.
Possibly a stupid question but for those medical cases, can't they just put cannabis (cannabinoids?) into pill form and make it into a prescription medication? Unless that's what the article is proposing and I was just too lazy to read it
They already do this with 'cannabis edibles' like cookies, butter, chocolate etc.
Last edited:
It is not possible to tax cannabis in the same way they tax alcohol because cannabis doesn't have any trademarks. And it's very difficult to trademark a strain of cannabis because it is simply genetics. Basically cannabis is open source like linux, you can grow, redistribute and modify a strain as much as you want, whereas the main Alcohol market is closed like Apple, I know you get some small time brewers but this is exactly the same thing you cant replicate their brand at another location and they cant replicate another brand.
Weed differs because the seed/genetics/strain producers aren't the ones selling the weed, they're simply selling a seed.
Therefore the reality is you can NEVER produce a batch of Smirnoff at home then sell it to the supermarket wholesale. Even though you can "make alcohol at home easier" it is pointless because there is no market for crap alcohol
.But with cannabis you can take ANY high demand strain and grow it to perfection, because the end product depends on the skill and dedication of the grower, not some trade secrets secured through trademarks and licensing.
Basically if 1,000 gallons of Jack Daniels are imported into the UK, the government puts duty on it the second it is imported, they also know how much they will make through VAT based on RRP. If some guy grows some high grade Super Silver Haze in their wardrobe, well you get the idea, it's just not the same at all.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
It is not possible to tax cannabis in the same way they tax alcohol because cannabis doesn't have any trademarks. And it's very difficult to trademark a strain of cannabis because it is simply genetics. Basically cannabis is open source like linux, you can grow, redistribute and modify a strain as much as you want, whereas the main Alcohol market is closed like Apple, I know you get some small time brewers but this is exactly the same thing you cant replicate their brand at another location and they cant replicate another brand.
Weed differs because the seed/genetics/strain producers aren't the ones selling the weed, they're simply selling a seed.
Therefore the reality is you can NEVER produce a batch of Smirnoff at home then sell it to the supermarket wholesale. Even though you can "make alcohol at home easier" it is pointless because there is no market for crap alcohol
But with cannabis you can take ANY high demand strain and grow it to perfection, because the end product depends on the skill and dedication of the grower, not some trade secrets secured through trademarks and licensing.
Basically if 10,000 gallons of Jack Daniels are imported into the UK, the government puts duty on it the second it is imported, they also know how much they will make through VAT based on RRP. If some guy grows some high grade Super Silver Haze in their wardrobe, well you get the idea, it's just not the same at all.
So why is there a tobacco market and tobacco brands then? It's just a plant too
Because it's still a trademarked process going on to produce different brands of tobacco products. Like the addition of chemicals which keep the cigarette lit for example, among many other chemicals and processes, as well as the addition of cardboard pulp and other **** found in cigarettes.
There are only a few actual "types" of tobacco out there, the process of blending them/curing them/etc in different ways is what gives different cigarette brands their unique taste.
Again this differs from cannabis where you can simply grow a strain of high grade anything you want. You cant grow a pack of Benson and Hedges Silver at home. You cant just say "next month I'm gonna grow some Marlboro"
.Yes, tobacco is a plant you grow, but a pack of Benson and Hedges is not "just a plant".
Same way alcohol is just a simple chemical you can make at home, but you cant make a bottle of Jack Daniels at home.
Cannabis is still a pure drug you smoke straight off the plant with no blending/further processing/secret recipes. I don't want capitalist corporations creating processes to chemicalise and trademark it and polluting/exploiting the natural purity of cannabis.
Last edited:
Suspended
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 9,480
Nick Clegg looking to get back all those lost Lib Dem voters...
I don't think the electorate will be making that mistake again.
Suspended
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2015
- Posts
- 2,634
Because it's still a trademarked process going on to produce different brands of tobacco products. Like the addition of chemicals which keep the cigarette lit for example, among many other chemicals and processes, as well as the addition of cardboard pulp and other **** found in cigarettes.
There are only a few actual "types" of tobacco out there, the process of blending them/curing them/etc in different ways is what gives different cigarette brands their unique taste.
Again this differs from cannabis where you can simply grow a strain of high grade anything you want. You cant grow a pack of Benson and Hedges Silver at home. You cant just say "next month I'm gonna grow some Marlboro"
Yes, tobacco is a plant you grow, but a pack of Benson and Hedges is not "just a plant".
Same way alcohol is just a simple chemical you can make at home, but you cant make a bottle of Jack Daniels at home.
Cannabis is still a pure drug you smoke straight off the plant with no blending/further processing/secret recipes. I don't want capitalist corporations creating processes to chemicalise and trademark it and polluting/exploiting the natural purity of cannabis.
This doesn't happen in Amsterdam/America though, it's straight from the plant without any additives.
Also it's laced with impurities on the street, not everywhere mind you but still it happens, depending the vendor etc..
But I get what you're saying.
:/
Not remotely true.
There will be bug brands selling it (probbaky the same companies that sell cigs and alcohol now) with thier own prefered strain and pricessing but thats beside the point taxing is easy.
Vat
Then duty based on the % of thc per gram sold
Plus any punitive duty auch as there is on tobacco products ler gram or as a percentage of cost.
It is very easy to tax cannabis just like everytjing else is easily taxed.
Like flowers...
There are are more variations and posibilities of alcoholic drinks than there are weed strains though.
And most can be made at home heck can buy a kit from the supermarket and be drinking in a few weeks.
The vast majority of the population is not going to go to the expense and effort to grow thier own, just like they dont grow thier own veg for the most part.
Something does not need to be trade marked to be taxed.
Yeah but most peopels "homegrown" wil be ****. Versus the tens of millions of pound investment in comercial farming and growing operations where everything is monitored and tested and the same every time.
If you seriously think the second its legal the majority of stoners are going to suddenly become horticulturalist youre insane.
Most will be down tesco buying a 10 pack of Marlbro greens
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
This
You're right however most coffeeshops in Amsterdam are only viable because of the strong tourist trade. The further you are from a coffee shop you will find that your regular Joes will be purchasing directly from the growers themselves.
Last edited:
Legalise all drugs that people want to take so the criminals are taken out of the supply chain along with their prices, removes the need for acquisitive crime, ensures the safety of the product and provides work in pharmacies and tax to the economy.
There was a report out this week which suggested that cannabis could bring in £1bn in taxes if regulated, as well as freeing up police time.
I'm all for it. It seems to be working in the American states that have done it.
I'm all for it. It seems to be working in the American states that have done it.