Cannabis - Best as a Class B or C

[Judge Mortis]

Caused by prohibition, not the drug itself. Don't get the two confused.

Either way ..... not nice to see.

How many people use alcohol fine?

If you are talking about not abusing of alcohol, then I can confidently stick my hand up believe it or not.

Would it have been so easy to find someone to take stolen gear if they weren't already involved with criminals?

It could be being up at 4:45am this morning but could that question be re-phrased

Don't claim problems caused by criminalisation are reasons to justify the continued prohibition of drugs.

Dolph, I just believe that some things are not for the public domain to use as they please and that includes Cannabis

(Fwiw, I don't take drugs, never have, but I want a working solution, something the current system definitely doesn't)

You are not the only one who wants that solution. The current system does not work efficiently despite the Government's insistence that it does and the Misuse of Drugs Act is now 36 years old and not geared towards todays problems.

As for legalisation across the board though? Not for me.

 

[Dolph]

Either way ..... not nice to see.

Definitely not, and I would never say otherwise.

If you are talking about not abusing of alcohol, then I can confidently stick my hand up believe it or not.

Exactly, there are plenty of people who can use legal narcotics responsibly.

It could be being up at 4:45am this morning but could that question be re-phrased

What I'm saying is that because you currently have to associate with criminals and undesireables to get drugs, it puts you in contact with people who would happily buy stolen goods too.

Dolph, I just believe that some things are not for the public domain to use as they please and that includes Cannabis

The thing is prohibition doesn't stop them being in the public domain, or it certainly hasn't in the case of cannabis. If you can't make something go away, isn't it better to make it as safe as possible?

You are not the only one who wants that solution. The current system does not work efficiently despite the Government's insistence that it does and the Misuse of Drugs Act is now 36 years old and not geared towards todays problems.

As for legalisation across the board though? Not for me.

While I want to see legalisation across the board, I'd also want to see steep rises in penalties for doing anything under the influence of drugs or to feed the habit. I would also have as much put into education and research as possible, warnings like on tobacco and taxation.

 

[Judge Mortis]

What I'm saying is that because you currently have to associate with criminals and undesireables to get drugs, it puts you in contact with people who would happily buy stolen goods too.

A fair comment ... although I couldn't possibly condone that.

The thing is prohibition doesn't stop them being in the public domain, or it certainly hasn't in the case of cannabis. If you can't make something go away, isn't it better to make it as safe as possible?

I meant legally in the public domain, again 4:45am.

While I want to see legalisation across the board, I'd also want to see steep rises in penalties for doing anything under the influence of drugs or to feed the habit. I would also have as much put into education and research as possible, warnings like on tobacco and taxation.

In education, we agree on that as it is essential but legalisation across the board we cannot agree. I cannot agree that heroin should be legalised, nor the same be said for crack cocaine or the likes of crystal meth. Even regulated, the effects are too dangerous to contemplate it being accepted like I would have a pint.

The alternative? I will have to get back to you on that one as when you said the current system does not work you have hit the nail on the proverbial head.

 

[Bear]

Because you were typecasting and thus judging me...



Many experts and authorities on the subject seem to disagree with you on the severity of its addictiveness. http://www.drugprevent.demon.co.uk/New look of Website/papers_items/is cannabis addictive.html

I dont care what any so called expert says because its more than likely going to be an agenda driven lie. Do you think any society that drugs are illegal are going to publish any research that is going to say drugs are safe and ok to use ?? The experts are the millions of users that are all over the world as they have experience first hand.

The idiot that stated cannabis is harder to give up than cocaine proves that they are clueless and are driven by an agenda.

 

[Richdog]

I dont care what any so called expert says because its more than likely going to be an agenda driven lie.

One big conspiracy eh? These experts have carried out independent and objective testing with many trial users and have likely seen the effect for years, they are infinitely more qualified than you on the subject.

The idiot that stated cannabis is harder to give up than cocaine proves that they are clueless and are driven by an agenda.

Why? Please explain in detail why you believe this.

 

[Bear]

One big conspiracy eh? These experts have carried out independent and objective testing with many trial users and have likely seen the effect for years, they are infinitely more qualified than you on the subject.



Why? Please explain in detail why you believe this.

There are very few comprehensive genuine research tests on drugs because they are illegal. It doesnt take much thought to see that if something is illegal, any research to say that it is not harmfull or safe to use will be covered up. As to people being experts, if they know first hand what the drugs they are studying then I will conceed they may be experts, if they dont then they are as much an expert as me reading and studying about racing driving and claiming to be an expert racing driver.

I knew two people that became addicted to cocaine and saw them get into state. Having also done it myself quite a few times I can see why people can become addicted to it although its not as addictive through occaisonal useage than people would think. I also know loads of people that used to smoke dope myslef included and they can and did go without even though they were habitual users. Any serious dope smoker would have experienced a drought at some time and many didnt climb the walls any more so that someone that wasnt able to have a drink for how ever many weeks.

 

[Richdog]

Well conversely I saw many that were heavily addicted, because they smoked it every day and were never in a "normal" state of mind that wasn't influenced by it. It stays in your system for a long time, and over a long period of time that feeling becomes normal... meaning that when you don't use it it's very hard. I saw this on more than a fair few occasions.

Any any scientist could study the effects in a country where it's legalised, or in worst case simply study them via drug rehabilitation clinics. You can't discount scientific studies simply because in your personal (and my opinion misguided) view that there''s some big conspiracy going on and that because it's illegal it couldn't possibly be studied thoroughly.

 

[TheDean]

What do you want, a sodding medal? I bow to thee o' normal, professional, balanced individual... lol...

lol - I had a panic attack one of the first times I smoked it at UNi. Never did it again after that.....thought I was having a heart attack. All my mates found it quite amusing, and I suppose I do now, but at the time it was horrible. I thought I was going to die.

Don't do drugs kids!

 

[cosmogenesis]

I agree that because cannabis is a bad thing for a minority of the population in terms of taking it that it needs to be controlled but only in the same way that alcohol, cigarettes and gambling do as they can ruin lives to.

Cannabis like many other things requires the usual left wing liberals act of education to limit its effects on society.

 

[Bear]

I agree that because cannabis is a bad thing for a minority of the population in terms of taking it that it needs to be controlled but only in the same way that alcohol, cigarettes and gambling do as they can ruin lives to.

Cannabis like many other things requires the usual left wing liberals act of education to limit its effects on society.

Exactly, a minority that drink alcohol are alcoholics. Is it the drink that is at fault or the people, after all plenty people partake in it yet are perfectly fine. I hate all this gross hypocrisy.

 

[Judge Mortis]

Also, would decriminalsation take criminality out of the loop entirely?

Would dealers and importers say, fair enough it's legal and I will have to find another trade or would we see corruption with legalised sources and supply routes intercepted, officials bribed or threatened and product hijacked by criminal enterprises to undercut the authorised supplier?

 

[Bear]

Well conversely I saw many that were heavily addicted, because they smoked it every day and were never in a "normal" state of mind that wasn't influenced by it. It stays in your system for a long time, and over a long period of time that feeling becomes normal... meaning that when you don't use it it's very hard. I saw this on more than a fair few occasions.

Any any scientist could study the effects in a country where it's legalised, or in worst case simply study them via drug rehabilitation clinics. You can't discount scientific studies simply because in your personal (and my opinion misguided) view that there''s some big conspiracy going on and that because it's illegal it couldn't possibly be studied thoroughly.

Perhaps then we see addiction differently. I dont see people smoking dope everyday necessarily as addiction, just like I know people that have several glasses of wine everyday arent addicted.

I see addiction as people having to have the stuff be it alcohol, cigarettes or drugs else they suffer physically as a consequence of not having it. I knew when I was smoking everyday that I did so because I enjoyed it not because I needed to. I never smoked at work and it never affected my performance like any of my friends that held down decent jobs.

I have yet to see any genuine studies on drug taking that doesnt just rant on about a small minority of people suffering adversely and not look at it as a whole picture. What is the percentage of people that suffer adversly and how does that compare with alcohol etc. People that are taking cannabis and are fine isnt interesting but looking at the negative effects is.

 

[dirtydog]

Perhaps then we see addiction differently. I dont see people smoking dope everyday necessarily as addiction, just like I know people that have several glasses of wine everyday arent addicted.

I see addiction as people having to have the stuff be it alcohol, cigarettes or drugs else they suffer physically as a consequence of not having it. I knew when I was smoking everyday that I did so because I enjoyed it not because I needed to. I never smoked at work and it never affected my performance like any of my friends that held down decent jobs.

I don't agree with your view of addiction. Just because you do something because you enjoy it, doesn't mean you aren't addicted. Just because your body doesn't have a physical dependence upon drugs/alcohol, doesn't mean you aren't psychologically addicted to it.

I would say that someone who drinks/takes drugs every day is addicted by definition. It has become a way of life for them. If you cannot give up the habit without a second thought then you are addicted. Habitual drug users/drinkers will not be able to just stop without serious cravings to get more of their favourite substance.

 

[Richdog]

Perhaps then we see addiction differently. I dont see people smoking dope everyday necessarily as addiction, just like I know people that have several glasses of wine everyday arent addicted.

"Several glasses" of wine is very different to 10 spliffs of strong cannabis... very different effects, with the latter being considerably more powerful and life-affecting.

I see addiction as people having to have the stuff be it alcohol, cigarettes or drugs else they suffer physically as a consequence of not having it. I knew when I was smoking everyday that I did so because I enjoyed it not because I needed to. I never smoked at work and it never affected my performance like any of my friends that held down decent jobs.

Psychological addiction can be every bit as powerful as the physical... and it is medically and scientifically recognised, there's no doubt of that.

I don't agree with your view of addiction. Just because you do something because you enjoy it, doesn't mean you aren't addicted. Just because your body doesn't have a physical dependence upon drugs/alcohol, doesn't mean you aren't psychologically addicted to it.

I would say that someone who drinks/takes drugs every day is addicted by definition. It has become a way of life for them. If you cannot give up the habit without a second thought then you are addicted. Habitual drug users/drinkers will not be able to just stop without serious cravings to get more of their favourite substance.

Agreed.

 

[MookJong]

A few years ago I would have said class C or legalise, but not now. I truely believe the effects are extremely dangerous for some people, I've seen one friend in particular ruin his life with the stuff.

A lot of my other friends who smoked frequently all started to cut down once they hit 25-26 because it was really starting to catch up with them.

The strength of the stuff being smoked today is far higher than in the past and I believe it's a bit of a time bomb with the true effects yet to be seen in our generation.

 

[Bear]

I don't agree with your view of addiction. Just because you do something because you enjoy it, doesn't mean you aren't addicted. Just because your body doesn't have a physical dependence upon drugs/alcohol, doesn't mean you aren't psychologically addicted to it.

I would say that someone who drinks/takes drugs every day is addicted by definition. It has become a way of life for them. If you cannot give up the habit without a second thought then you are addicted. Habitual drug users/drinkers will not be able to just stop without serious cravings to get more of their favourite substance.

Psychological addiction is as I said earlier is distinctly different. Certain people can get psychologically addicted to pretty much anything but that doesnt mean it is the object that is the problem but the person.

We were talking about the point being mentioned by Richdog that he thought cannabis is addictive. In my opinion, just because people can get psycologically addicted to it, it doesnt mean the substance is addictive in itself.

I agree that if you cant give up then you are addicted, but there is a very distinct difference between physically needing something because their body is suffering from withdrawal to someone that cant give something up because they are mentally weak.

 

[dirtydog]

Psychological addiction is as I said earlier is distinctly different. Certain people can get psychologically addicted to pretty much anything but that doesnt mean it is the object that is the problem but the person.

We were talking about the point being mentioned by Richdog that he thought cannabis is addictive. In my opinion, just because people can get psycologically addicted to it, it doesnt mean the substance is addictive in itself.

I agree that if you cant give up then you are addicted, but there is a very distinct difference between physically needing something because their body is suffering from withdrawal to someone that cant give something up because they are mentally weak.

What's the difference at the end of the day? The end result is the same. If something is highly pleasurable, like for example alcohol, then a large number of people are going to become addicted to it. Just because not everyone does, does not mean it is wrong to call alcohol addictive. Likewise cannabis. It is really just semantics in my opinion.

 

[Richdog]

We were talking about the point being mentioned by Richdog that he thought cannabis is addictive. In my opinion, just because people can get psycologically addicted to it, it doesnt mean the substance is addictive in itself.

I agree that if you cant give up then you are addicted, but there is a very distinct difference between physically needing something because their body is suffering from withdrawal to someone that cant give something up because they are mentally weak.

No-one is debating the fact that they are different... but what me and DD are saying is that as an addiction it is no less potent and real. As DD says, we are largely arguing semantics here.

 

[Bear]

What's the difference at the end of the day? The end result is the same. If something is highly pleasurable, like for example alcohol, then a large number of people are going to become addicted to it. Just because not everyone does, does not mean it is wrong to call alcohol addictive. Likewise cannabis. It is really just semantics in my opinion.

Because it isnt, just like fast food, gambling, chocolate, swimming or any other thing that people like to do repeatedly isnt addictive despite them doing it everyday.

Are we going to classify everything people like as being addictive or is it that a minority of people that are useless at controlling themselves going to set the agenda. If we classify things that arent physically addictive as if they are, we are absoving any responsibility from that person and passing it onto the object. I rather sort the problem in the first place and ask why people are becoming increasingly spineless and want to blame everything on everything else but themselves.

I love driving my car, I do it everyday I must be addicted, hell I must be addicted to work, I do it virtually everyday and most of the time I dont want to do it but I do !!

 

[Richdog]

Because it isnt, just like fast food, gambling, chocolate, swimming or any other thing that people like to do repeatedly isnt addictive despite them doing it everyday.

Gambling IS an addiction... lol!

Are we going to classify everything people like as being addictive or is it that a minority of people that are useless at controlling themselves going to set the agenda. If we classify things that arent physically addictive as if they are, we are absoving any responsibility from that person and passing it onto the object. I rather sort the problem in the first place and ask why people are becoming increasingly spineless and want to blame everything on everything else but themselves.

Objective and raitonal... just the way I like it.

I love driving my car, I do it everyday I must be addicted, hell I must be addicted to work, I do it virtually everyday and most of the time I dont want to do it but I do !!

This is where your argument don't wash with me. these are the sort of silly comparative examples you are coming up with.