Police raid house because of electric heater.

That does not mean it is not dangerous.
It is less dangerous than two drugs we consider "safe" for everyday consumption, therefore it is safe for everyday consumption.

Personally I find it far safer than cigarettes due to the ability to vaporise and thus not have all the tar and other such things and the air you inhale is less hot
 
How so?

How is someone who grows cannabis and sells a bit on the side to help finance the growing cost scum?

My mum keeps chickens, and sells half a dozen eggs for 50p as a bit 'on the side' to help pay for the corn, someone converting their attic to grow up to 2.4 MILLION pounds of drugs a year isn't just a 'bit on the side is it' get our of fairy land...

I'm only going to take the first two points as 50% true as it's from the Daily Mail, but Vietnamese drug barons don't sound like nice charitable folk, if they are making so much money, where is the millions of pounds of good it is doing the UK, they could have Vietnamese Drug Baron sponsored playgrounds for young people, or Vietnamese Drug Baron sponsored Libraries for poorer areas, oh oh oh there aren't any...
article1039768021ed5910.jpg
 
Last edited:
To play devil's advocate, having your home raided and searched by the police is one of the most traumatic experiences and gravest invasions of privacy an individual can undergo at the hands of the state.

You could potentially argue, as you appear to be doing, from a utilitarian perspective that the long-term benefits of such tactics as these outweigh the costs (i.e. false positives), but let's not characterise raiding the homes of innocent people as "a bit of inconvenience".

It's a fair point you make and can completely appreciate the trauma of having a house raided - whilst not directly done to me, I have seen it happen.

However as you summed up in your last paragraph that's exactly what I was driving at, though as you say, it's more than a bit of an inconvenience. However, I don't see the point of making a song and dance out of this particular news item.
 
We were debating relative dangers, both tobacco and alcohol are dangerous. There is clear evidence that cannabis can cause mental issues in some people. Therefore it is dangerous. Therefore you are wrong.

Theres SOME evidence, none clear, alcohol can have a bad effect and cause mental problems, someone heavily depressed who drinks alcohol will often be worse.

Long term alcoholics are rarely anything but very depressed and unhappy people.

Anyway he was both right and wrong, cannibis itself ISN'T harmful, we all take dozens of substances that change our brain chemistry every day, for better or worse, caffeine, alcohol, htp triptophan from chicken, etc, etc.

Why he's wrong is, cannibis itself isn't harmful but while its illegal the distribution of it can well be harmful, gangs growing and selling the stuff, fighting over supply. We've created more crime and harm from making it illegal and forcing the distribution and sale to be so highly profitable for criminals, than any harm cannabis would cause a few people if it were legal.

Theres VERY minor evidence it can cause some pretty severe mental issues, but not much has been found to say if those same people weren't predisposed to the problem in the first place, were already developing it, or if something else potentially caused it.

Remember if you go into a cancer ward and ask how many of them have eaten a Lion Bar before, if 90% said yes you could incorrectly conclude that Lion Bars cause cancer. Extremely limited research in the area(in an area) can come out with some wild and completely unsubstantiated theories. Due to the illegal nature of cannabis there hasn't been much widespread and consistant research done.

I was amused and annoyed at the same time. There is a lot of it going on, but surely the heat spot from a leccy heater is not enough to arouse suspicion. Clearly not!

If it was in a house yes but its rare for a normally very cold garage to be showing the same kind of heat.

Normal heat readings from a house wouldn't be normal for a garage or a shed.
 
Last edited:
That depends on use.



That does not mean it is not dangerous.

It doesnt mean that its not dangerous but as a country it is hard to explain to the general population that your drug laws are based almost entirely on propaganda and misinformation.

Nearly every ex-government drugs minister or advises has come out and said that cannabis is not as dangerous as alcohol and tobacco and should be legalised for the savings it would bring, the money it would generate and the fact that it is not that dangerous.

It causes mental health issues in some people, they are in the severe minority and they tend to be heavy smokers. If it doesnt agree with you then you should not smoke it. Would a diabetic keep cramming his face with sweets when they realised they had the condition.

There are people that get allergic reactions to alcohol etc, we accept that these are exceptions and that some measure of self control must be exercised.

The government have backed themselves into a corner with regards to cannabis as they have demonised it so much and lied so much about it that its very hard to do a 180 now.
 
Theres SOME evidence, none clear, alcohol can have a bad effect and cause mental problems, someone heavily depressed who drinks alcohol will often be worse.

Long term alcoholics are rarely anything but very depressed and unhappy people.

Anyway he was both right and wrong, cannibis itself ISN'T harmful, we all take dozens of substances that change our brain chemistry every day, for better or worse, caffeine, alcohol, htp triptophan from chicken, etc, etc.

Why he's wrong is, cannibis itself isn't harmful but while its illegal the distribution of it can well be harmful, gangs growing and selling the stuff, fighting over supply. We've created more crime and harm from making it illegal and forcing the distribution and sale to be so highly profitable for criminals, than any harm cannabis would cause a few people if it were legal.

Theres VERY minor evidence it can cause some pretty severe mental issues, but not much has been found to say if those same people weren't predisposed to the problem in the first place, were already developing it, or if something else potentially caused it.

Remember if you go into a cancer ward and ask how many of them have eaten a Lion Bar before, if 90% said yes you could incorrectly conclude that Lion Bars cause cancer. Extremely limited research in the area(in an area) can come out with some wild and completely unsubstantiated theories. Due to the illegal nature of cannabis there hasn't been much widespread and consistant research done.



If it was in a house yes but its rare for a normally very cold garage to be showing the same kind of heat.

Normal heat readings from a house wouldn't be normal for a garage or a shed.

Wow DM, thats a rather nice interesting post. I haven't really heard much from you outside of the sports arena. You are banging your head against a brick wall here though because most people seem to believe all the **** they hear about weed.

Ive tried the brain altering argument, the weak link to mental health but most people just end the discussion there and shrink back into their own world where their views dont have to have any merit or be based on evidence.
 
I don't think its right how they can raid someones home on suspicion alone, especially when its something as weak as a bit of excess heat, its almost like precrime or thought crime, unless they have actual evidence beyond reasonable doubt then it shouldn't be allowed, hovering around and looking at peoples homes gives off the wrong message, it feels like we're living under surveillance and if you act differently its suspicious and you could be questioned or raided for it.

This sort of thing will seem to most as ok right now but in the future when drones are flying around on autopilot, looking for suspiciousness activity, it will be too late.
 
I don't think its right how they can raid someones home on suspicion alone, especially when its something as weak as a bit of excess heat, its almost like precrime or thought crime, unless they have actual evidence beyond reasonable doubt then it shouldn't be allowed, hovering around and looking at peoples homes gives off the wrong message, it feels like we're living under surveillance and if you act differently its suspicious and you could be questioned or raided for it.

This sort of thing will seem to most as ok right now but in the future when drones are flying around on autopilot, looking for suspiciousness activity, it will be too late.

Each generation that comes through sees such current activity as the 'norm' so people accept it, though things are and will change, eventually.
 
I don't think its right how they can raid someones home on suspicion alone, especially when its something as weak as a bit of excess heat, its almost like precrime or thought crime, unless they have actual evidence beyond reasonable doubt then it shouldn't be allowed, hovering around and looking at peoples homes gives off the wrong message, it feels like we're living under surveillance and if you act differently its suspicious and you could be questioned or raided for it.

This sort of thing will seem to most as ok right now but in the future when drones are flying around on autopilot, looking for suspiciousness activity, it will be too late.

This.

It's a slippery road, and when we have a police force able to scan everywhere with thermal imagers and be able to force entry onto private property due to the heat characteristics of a heater, it gets even slippier.

I'm anti drug, but at the end of the day, most people I know smoke the rubbish, a fair percentage more do coke and other related drugs, and to be quite honest they function well as humans, as well as making a conscious choice about their own bodies.

I reckon if cocaine wasn't so hard to smuggle in and was legally made, then it wouldn't cost £60/£70 on the gram. With normal prices in mind, then there would be practically no need for robberies.

Then again, it wouldn't gain much in tax, so hey ho. ;)
 
How's this shocking? police have suspicion, they raid, they find nothing, they appologise...

You just quoted what I found shocking...

The fact that it is such a vague suspicion based on the house being too hot, such flimsy evidence should not allow a warrant. It's like raiding someone's house because they "look like" a criminal.
 
Back
Top Bottom