Make cannabis a Class A Drug, say Conservative Police Commissioners...

Devilman said:
I must admit that when I read the previous posts I responded to, it did indeed appear as though you were in the "it's evil, it stinks, ban it all" camp.

Thank you for clarifying your position with regards to usage / legalization, I guess it may indeed have been part of how you worded things that made it appear otherwise.

You seem a lot more rational and reasonable now :p :D
Click to expand...
I appreciate that thanks bud.
 
Problem with weed is unlike most other drugs, it stinks and effects people around it, some people are allergic to it too.

I can smell when my neighbours are smoking it, it's awful and lingers. Also you'll fail a drugs test if you have been in close proximity with someone smoking it. Which is a worry for people in the military or hold security clearance.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
Also you'll fail a drugs test if you have been in close proximity with someone smoking it.
Click to expand...

I watch 100s of these Cop programs on the TV and the other week they picked up a driver, tested him and he failed for weed.
He absolutely protested his innocence saying he was a lecturer but had been around students who he was a bit lax with.
He was taught a massive lesson never to hang around people with weed and he was under when he got to the station.
Obviously we're all thinking 'of course you don't partake' but to be honest he did sound and look like he was truthful.
 
Nasher said:
Problem with weed is unlike most other drugs, it stinks and effects people around it, some people are allergic to it too.

I can smell when my neighbours are smoking it, it's awful and lingers. Also you'll fail a drugs test if you have been in close proximity with someone smoking it. Which is a worry for people in the military or hold security clearance.
Click to expand...

I would guess that you would need to be in an unventilated environment for prolonged periods before passively consumed THC would show up in a drugs test.

Plenty of time for someone to leave, and smoking is already banned in all indoor public spaces
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
I would guess that you would need to be in an unventilated environment for prolonged periods before passively consumed THC would show up in a drugs test.
Click to expand...


Pretty much. Many years ago there was an experiment where a guy spent something like eight hours in a small shed with four guys who smoked massive spliffs pretty much non-stop. THC was detectable IIRC, but at very low levels - certainly not enough to affect him, although the section 5a RTA test might fail him as it is a ridiculously low level. But it would be close. But the defence trot out this excuse all the time, because magistrates believe it. Realistically you are not going to fail a section 5a without actually inhaling directly - a more than once too. Passive cannabis is NOT a Thing.
 
malachi said:
No point taxing something which tax benefits won't be passed onto the public. Instead it would be used to fill up the back pockets of the government.
Click to expand...

Well in that case don't tax anything and we can have private policing, private healthcare, pay as you go roads and so on. I'm sure that will end well for most people.
 
Last edited:
Rai200 said:
Well in that case don't tax anything and we can have private policing, private healthcare, pay as you go roads and so on. I'm sure that will end well for most people.
Click to expand...
Fine by me!

Show me a person who likes paying tax, I hear people complain about always paying tax.

Also, private healthcare works very well where I live :)
 
Last edited:
What's the point in class Aing it when effectively you legally bribe the police with a cannabis caution anyway? The ABC system isn't based on how harmful a drug is like people think but IMO the amount of medical Vs recreational use it has. It's more policitcal than anything.

Eg, testosterone, benzos, pregablin, Ketamine are all widely prescribed (class C) than say mushrooms, LSD, mdma, DMT that aren't something you see prescribed (class A) although there are prescription opioids that are class A but that's due to the fact they are incredibly addictive.

From a health perspective they should scrap the system and build a new one ranking drugs based on harm to the user and society as advised by Prof David Nutt.

Making cannabis more illegal / class A would probably make it more difficult for it to be researched and prescribed. Dr Strassman (USA not UK) who wrote the book DMT the spirit molecule stated that the illegality of psychedelics made it very difficult to legally research the drug to understand psychosis and why we have the compound DMT present in the human body and why does the pinal gland secrete it during death on rodent models? After the 70s it became almost impossible to get permission and go through the legal processes to have the drug manufactured and approved. This is one reason we have a huge blank space of research since the 70s-now but ONLY now people who've been using these drugs medically ie microdosers are gaining some pharmaceutical interest.

I do think smoking cannabis daily for a lot of people demotivates your drive in life, when I'm stoned I don't wanna do a single thing, which is why I dislike cannabis myself and would advise people to take into consideration who use it. It's not like being balls deep in a trip. I do however think cannabis has medical benefits and should be available.
 
Last edited:
hurfdurf said:
No, you won’t. The threshold is significantly high enough that you’ll only fail one if you have been deliberately inhaling it directly.
Click to expand...

Well UKSV have been warning people of it on vetting interviews recently, so yes it's being picked up on some tests.
 
Last edited:
Tony Williams said:
What's the point in class Aing it when effectively you legally bribe the police with a cannabis caution anyway? The ABC system isn't based on how harmful a drug is like people think but IMO the amount of medical Vs recreational use it has. It's more policitcal than anything.
Click to expand...

I think you will find your assertion to be incorrect.

If I remember correctly, The particular classification system you are thinking of is called the "Schedule" system, not the Class System.

Schedule 1 drugs are things which are deemed to have 0 medical use.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom