Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical.

And the revenue it'd raise - that'd come in handy too.

I also believe that cannabis should be decriminalised along the same line as the netherlands, it would reduce the impact of drug dealers and crime. Alcohol is legal and it causes more violent crime and deaths than any other drug available, it makes sense for people to have the right to use cannabis if they so desire.

decriminalise it BUT tax it heavily as it can cause mental problems reduce the will to work

drug abuse will ALWAYS be a part of society and I appreciate that laws must be in place to hold a balance that does not allow it to spiral out of control. Legalising cannabis and imposing restrictions on its use in public, not allowing people to drive whilst under the influence and being able to add tax to the purchase will be a way for the government to earn some much needed revenue.

How ridiculous to waste time, resources and prison space on people who use cannabis. It's time to move on as all attempts to prevent use by legislation have totally failed. Just visit Amsterdam and you will see why this is the simplest solution to a probelm that CANNOT be solved.

Something like this has been suggested in California, and is Prop 19 in their next set of Prop's to be voted on. It might be worth to look at that, and draw from it.

The police will never win the war on drugs and have admited so. It's about time we took a grown up view on this and decriminalise what is essentially a plant.
Humans have been using cannabis for many thousands of years and i'm sure will be in many thousands to come. How many billions are being spent in the criminal world on this every year? go along way to getting rid of the huge black hole.

As a person who grew up right through the whole "Drugs are Bad" phase and "Just say No". These campaigns failed utterly!

They were targetted at the root of society within schools and colleges. Still they failed.

Legalise, Control and well Tax obviously.

Just get on with it and stop waisting another generations time.......

cannabis should be legal....a huge proportion of the population have been using it for years...the money spent by the government in demonising it is a crime in itself. i and many others have now got a criminal record for using it. where is the victim of this crime?? who did i harm? why is it wrong for me to use it..

i think that cannibis should be legalised as in the netherlands, if you look at their way of life i think alot can be learnt. cannibis is used through out this country by many people, and it dose far less damage to socioty than alchol. if it was sold and taxed i beleive that it would greatly help with the overspend that we have been left with by the labour government!

This is long overdue, another basic and simple freedom of choice issue. We should adopt the Dutch system now.

I fully support the decriminalisation of cannabis. By putting a cigeratte-style tax on cannabis, the Government would be able to ensure the quality, quanity, and availablity of cannabis. It would stop the "Morrisons car park NHS Direct" sellers and drug pushers, taking their drugs into a mainstream arena where polcing would be far easier

It is time to be mature about the number of people who use cannabis on a daily basis who are no harm to anybody else. £20 on booze could cause someone to start a fight in a pub. £20 on cannabis could cause someone to stay at home or buy some more chocolate.

Every day, especially at the weekend, hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people become 'criminals' and consume drugs of one sort or another. Many people, some with responsible positions in this or that, choose to partake in activities they enjoy - lots of them have been doing it for decades! It really is time the law got off peoples backs and allowed them to do what they want to do - have a good time in the company of friends and like minded souls.

Decriminalisation does NOT solve the problem. We need full legalisation, regulation, age-restrictions, taxation, and all the other rules applied to the more harmful alcohol and tobacco industries.

PROHIBITION DOES NOT WORK.

Legalising and taxing cannabis would bring in a lot of revenue to help control Britain's debt problems. It will also take the dealing of drugs out of the streets, away from unscrupulous characters and allow more control.

Even more beneficial to society is that many people are likely to substitute alchohol for cannabis as their recreational drug of choice. While both can be harmful and open to abuse, cannabis does not cause the same violence and wrecklesness as alcohol.

I don't smoke cannabis and even if legalised I don't intend to, but I'm definitely in favour of this and feel it will have multiple benefits for Britain.

in the 60s the government had a choice to make and boy did they choose the wrong one to ban , alcohol claims hundreds of peoples lives a yr , canabis to my knowledge hasnt claimed any lives i feel this law needs a overall of its rules

I agree, legalise it. I know so many people who have taken it/are taking it and they are the nicest least paranoid people I know. Websites like talk to frank take their statistics from someone smoking canabis all day every day which is bound to have adverse effects. I vote legalise!

I'm tired of Government imposing rules on society because of something being bad for 'young people'. What about the rest of us, don't we count any more? I've smoked, drank, taken the odd drug for over 50 years, and I'm still here, sane and sensible. I don't feel like a criminal, but if someone had locked me up for such a simple thing as smoking cannabis I would have become so angry I probably would have turned to crime - just to spite the Establishment - the rule makers, who themselves are not innocent. Also, about young people, the more fuss you make about something being bad, the more they want to do it.

The War on drugs has failed, prohibition has failed as it did with alcohol in the US. Its time to take control of the drug trade and not leave it to street dealers who prey upon the weak the young and the desperate. Why are cannabis users locked up or lives blighted by a criminal record for doing exactly what many politicians lawyers and pop stars do regularly.Spain Germany Holland parts of the US and Canada all have woken up ..time we caught up and take control back from organised crime..simples

Decriminalise marihuana as in Holland and let 1000 cannabis cafes bloom on UK high streets. Let's stop criminalising millions of otherwise law abiding people, especially the youth of this country.

In response to steviedj who wrote "Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical."

What nonsense. Cannabis smokers aren't doing anyone any harm. To compare hash smoking to paedophilia is simply desparate nonsense. Lets decriminalise, regulate and tax the weed. This will deal a deadly blow to the economics of the whole illegal drug trade and allow police to target activities that are really harmful.

Let's try getting smart about this instead of peddling 1950s style reefer madness propaganda.

To Lewis Pritchard who argues that prohibition doesn't work. Prohibition certainly worked for Al Capone and the Mafia! It provided the basis for crime empires that endure to this day. We are repeating this trick in the UK as we speak.

I personally would go further than the Dutch model and do it properly!

Decriminalising drug use, according to the house of lords recent drugs debate, would save the country 19 billion pounds a year... Most of the drug prosecutions in the UK (as far as I am aware) are relating to cannabis.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/[…]/8735625.stm

I appreciate that for some people overuse can cause a problem, but it must be remembered that overuse of any drug, (eg. caffeine, alcohol, ) can, and probably will be problematic. However, criminalising these people is not the best way to help them to deal with the problem as part of society. Criminalisation of Cannabis users is extrememly costly and leads to their lives becoming worse rather than better. Just one example: Jobs in the future will be harder to come by therefore leading to an even bigger financial burden on society.

It is not fair to wage a war on some people who use some drugs based on lies and propaganda mainly from the USA against blacks and hispanics from a long time ago.

The use of cannabis is proven scientifically to be less harmful than that of alcohol or tobacco.

Cannabis has so many useful applications in medicine. For example MS, Pain control, Appetite and nausea control, Cancer cell reduction, and many more that we probably dont even know about yet as research into this medicine has been stunted by its prohibition.

Nobody has a right to tell another person what they can do with their own body, so long as it harms no other.

And finally, think of the tax it could raise aswell as the savings (as mentioned in first paragraph).

Natural cannabis has no health implications and it is less harmful than smoking and drinking. It can actually be beneficial and used for medical purposes, and it does not impose a physical addiction as hard drugs do. When people stick to smoking cannabis is because the like it and not because the body will respond badly go into a shock if it does not get it (like heroin). You could say it is comparable to Food, sweets, alcohol and cigarettes.

Of course there many variants of it on the streets which, after chemical processing can cause all sorts of problems. Also it is absolutely true that cannabis can be the stepping stone to hard drugs. But it is not cannabis presence that drives people to something stronger, but the lack of it. It has been noted that whenever there is lack of cannabis (always artificial) in the streets, a new wave of hard drug users emerges.

Legalising solves the above problems. Making it legal will drive the prices down, and even with further taxes it should still be cheap enough to help people stay away from illegal/expensive drugs. Also people could easily and cheaply grow it to make it more affordable.

You take the huge profits out of the equation and as an extension the criminal interest on it. Only natural cannabis should be legalised which has no health implications, and the market will be properly regulated. This should also create a situation of enough supply, to alleviate the stepping stone effect.

The Netherlands is the best example. We can learn a lot from how legalisation has affected society. I think it should be something to consider. Stop being conservative, look at the facts, and see if it makes sense in the modern British society.

People should have the freedom to make their own choices regarding substances, without the fear of ciminalisation. Individuals have the choice to smoke and drink, this should be no different.

Successful education around the substance is essential, and will enable individuals to make informed choices around using the substance.

You'll never win this war on drugs. Drugs have been around since the dawn of civilisation. Control them, tax them reasonably, take them out of influence of criminals.

The recent hysteria of methedrone says it all, no one has EVER died from smoking a cannabis joint, its harms are about a tenth of alcohol, its a plant that grows under Gods will

My word, the problem with the UK at present are the over zelous do gooders who always do more hare than help. And its is the do gooders that associate and manipulate people into believing some very weird things. to quote a previous comment "Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical.", that was a typical do gooder rant. ofcourse we wouldn't sugest the same because those crimes have victims. we are talking about somthing that is illegal probably due to personal dislike of the product when legislation came in to make it illegal. cannibis is at worst about as dangerous as smoking or drinking that are legal so please remove yourself from your high horse and be sensible instead of over zelous and atempting to manipulate us with misleading comments.

There has never been a conclusive study showing cannabis causes mental health problems. There have been many that show it as a possible mental health trigger but also some that show It as benifishial. Legalise it and tax it. Stop making people criminals for recreational use of a near harmless drug.

And btw, don't make arguments that like cannabis use to pedophiles it just makes you look stupid.

Alchol makes you stupid, cannabis makes you smart! That's surely one of the main reasons why past governments have regulated that way. And if cannabis really were so bad as the fear-mongers claim, how come two of its users have become Prime Minister and Deputy PrimeMinister. Of course it would be easy to say that it long since washed from their systems, but how do we not know that one of their insights whilst under the influence didn't give them the edge to get where they are now. If ever there were a ridiculous and unfair law it is prohibition of cannabis.

There is absolutely no medical evidence to justify cannabis being a class B drug. The politicians employ people to study the effects, then when they give their findings and it turns out cannabis is nowhere near as harmful as some people think, the politicians completely ignore them!

It can only be classed as a crime if there is a victim. If I smoke in my own home, on my own, where is the victim?!?!

This would help in cutting the Jail population by 10,000 + a year. People have a right to use other types of drugs to relax so why not Cannabis?

We are allowed to circumsize a baby, but not allowed to grow a harmless and wise plant. Everything is up-side-down and back-to-front!

"Where is the victim of this crime? Who did I harm?"

By putting your money into a multi-billion pound criminal industry, you have been sponsoring all kinds of criminal activity including assaults, GBH, murders, and the smuggling and dealing of hard drugs.

The argument for decriminalizing cannabis is that it might help to break the flow of cash from cannabis users to hardened criminals. But then again, it might not - it might simply give these criminals legitimacy.

Cannabis users should be questioning themselves, not the government. Why are you using your money to sponsor criminality?

Tax and be done with it. Will stop dealers on the streets and bring in needed revenue. It happens everywhere anyway.

people say taking cannibis leads to funding other major crimes and if it does legalise it. stop funding the criminals and make it a ligitimate business where they wont fund the criminals. And to the person who said "Cannabis users should be questioning themselves, not the government. Why are you using your money to sponsor criminality?", maybe when they do the answer is they don't want to do the legal drugs that cause more harm such as tobbaco or alchol so they are left with no other option but the drug dealer and as a person you must understand that sometimes the wieght of the world is to much and you need a little release and we all have difernt ways. some drink, some smoke and some smoke cannibis but i ask you this, what makes their form of relaxing worse than yours or mine because i know drinking and smoking can cause more harm? so please stop being so ignorant and give people a chance to live their lives their way and while they are living it their way lets just remove the crimanal aspect of it, legalise it because it doesnt hurt anyone. the true reason people are hurt by cannibis is not their fault, its the governments fault for crimanalising it in the first place and say we should be freed from these shackles of opression and given our human rights back!

Legislating and decriminalizing cannabis within control i.e. age restrictions, DUI, cultivation, sale, distribution - would certainly benefit the economy by placing a tax on the sale of regulated cannabis products through licensed premises.

The Netherlands is a prime example of how well this works and how in control they are of drug and crime. Though criminals may continue to undercut the legislated sale of cannabis and will continue to push illegal drugs; the percentage of loss to criminals will help fund many areas of the economy, including employment and community. Funds could be re-invested into communities to establish control clinics for harder drugs to help addicts get off illegal drugs (again look at The Netherlands).
  
The police, government etc. have spent too long wasting time, resources and budget chasing drug criminals – perhaps it’s time to play them at their own game and start winning?

What always amazes me about this debate is that there will always be 4 sides – the for, the against, the users, the suppliers. Whether the decision is for or against; the supplier will always be there because there is always a users needing/wanting produce.

I’m impressed by the governments innovations of opening these debates up to the public – its about time people had their say ….. but its always a different story if we’re listen to.

In the UK it is legal to drink, Legal to drive pretty much legal to enjoy your life. In your own home, your own castle you should be permitted to do what you want. I agree this issue is a difficult one to support or difficult to legalise. What difference does having a drink of wine in your home or having a spliff in your own home ? only that you pay taxes on wine and support an illegal crime when smoking.

If it was legalised, following already working guidelines and rules as working in the netherlands, how much tax could be generated and how less would money be going into illegal activities ?

The point being we are a mature county and people should be able to have the choice on their recreational time.

How can you put down or criminalise someone relaxing in their own time, yet it's acceptable to drink yourself to a stuper and end up in hospital costing the country more ?

Think about it please, things in moderation can come to no harm... the benefit would be to bring in more taxes and potentially reduce another route to crimes...

my two peneth, good luck running the uk.

Sorry everybody but I disagree. I do not want people openly smoking canabis in locations where I am or where other people who do not want to smoke it are. Secondary smoke might or might not be harmful, but it is uncomfortable. Second hand canabis smoke may well be more harmless but it will effect my mental state in a way that I could not accept.

@steviedj

John Stuart Mill would argue otherwise; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_principle

The use/sale of cannabis is only made into a true "crime" with victims BECAUSE it is illegal. Pushing the product underground only serves to create victims by supporting the drug industry and all that this entails; out in the open, where it can be properly controlled (and taxed), it is victimless. As such it can hardly be considered a crime.

Medical surveys and independent advice all show cannabis to be less harmful and less addictive than both alcohol and tobacco - see this chart http://bit.ly/VEguq - so arguments that it greatly affects people's health are invalid.

The arguments have been repeated so many times, it hardly bears repeating them. Coalition, listen to the independent advice. Listen to the people on here (if you want - the independent advice would probably be good enough to be fair). Just do what makes sense! It frustrates me greatly to live in a country where blatantly illeberal laws like this remain in place - please do what makes sense.

Sorry for the spate of posting by the way - not deliberate, the submission form is just dodgy.

Just because alcohol is legal is no argument that cannabis should be. There is sufficient medical evidence to prove that the use of cannabis causes major mental health issues. We need strict drug controls with severe penalties for those who peddle such disgusting killers of society. N, no, no to any decriminalisation.

Legalise / Control / Tax and of course freedom to choose as they can in Holland Switzerland Spain Portugal Canada and parts of the US come on Britain WAKE UP !!

I would legalize it and ecstasy so that our children do not fall prey to gangsters, whose poison can kill. Take the soft drug option out of the criminals hands.

It is well overdue.

Legalise / Control / Tax and of course freedom to choose as they can in Holland Switzerland Spain Portugal Canada and parts of the US come on Britain WAKE UP !!

Steviedj - If you believe that smoking a plant and (possibly, but only very slightly) harming yourself is comparable to raping children, then you sir, are an extremely sick individual with a warped understanding of the world.

Mikeoldroyd - well said.

I can't quite believe the lack of reasonable thinking in some people. Take this quote for example:

"Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same?"

What? How on EARTH can anybody compare smoking a product to chill out with abusing children? I give up with the country...

I really hope that the Tories can prove that conservative doesn't mean 'slave to the tabloids'. Labour did pretty well basing policy on reactionary, knee jerk tabloid stories, rather than evidence.

Now's your chance Dave.

When drugs were decriminalised in Portugal, almost every drug related statistic improved.
The amount of HIV transmissions from sharing needles halved, the drug rate fell and the number of people seeking to deal with their problem increased.

Citation
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10080

If I choose to have pepper on my potatos it's none of the Government's business (assuming I've paid my taxes on it and know the 'risks' associated with pepper)!
Why is it different if I want to consume some Marijuana? It's my body, I'm well educated about the facts and I'm harming no one else.

This approach has hardly been a disaster in the Netherlands.

Hopefully we can have a rational debate - in 1995 after Channel 4's Pot Night Clare Short suggest the time had come for a discussion and she was swiftly attacked by fellow MPs.

Perhaps now 15 years later we can be more mature about this and not pander to the whims of the right wing press.

When was the last time you heard of a cannabis user being arrested in a town centre on a Saturday night for being aggressive and abusive? I can't recall this ever happening. Now compare that to the number of drinkers arrested for causing trouble. The government needs to look closely at where the real trouble is. Cannabis users tend to stay home, watch TV and eat chocolate and crisps...ooo...a real threat to society there! In the event of anybody trying to start a fight with a cannabis user, the response is more likely to be "In a minute, I can't be bothered right now." Admittedly there is a very small minority of people who have a severe bad reaction to cannabis and this is usually something in their genetic make-up that reacts badly with the drug. Still, the cost to the NHS is minimal compared to the cost of dealing with those who drink far too much and end up in A&E every weekend. When have you ever heard on the news that dealing with cannabis users is huge drain on NHS resources? You hear it all the time about alcohol abuse. Many people who smoke cannabis are decent people with steady jobs and a mortgage who just prefer it to drinking. There are also those who find it beneficial for medical reasons such as MS and Arthritis. Is it right that these people should be branded as criminals when a drunken yob gets to just sleep it off in the police cell before being released to do it all over again the next weekend? I also agree that any decisions to be made on this subject should come from scientists and doctors rather than politicians who, with no disrespect, don't really know what they're talking about in comparison.

No one has ever overdosed on cannabis and no one has ever died as a result of smoking the drug!

There is no reason why this drug should be criminalised, it is a safer drug than alcohol and it would make sense to legalise it and just put restrictions on it, so it will be easier to control.

key points:

Cannabis does a lot more good to society than bad, it expands your creativity, heavily with art and music, and allows to follow your subconscious trains of thought, the worst with that can happen to your body if you have too much cannabis will be vomiting and most likely, unconsciousness. YOU CANNOT OVERDOSE.

Alcohol on the other hand, impairs your judgement, slows your reactions, and opens up your primal feeling, aggression, sex drive, personal ego, adrenaline. Overdose on it and you will need your stomach pumped and your liver is going to be damaged. Back to aggression, you put 50 alcohol intoxicated people together at a taxi rank and you WILL have violence.

You put 50 people under the influence of cannabis under the same conditions, you wont. Ever. Its a "peace" drug, if you can call it a drug, its just a plant that you smoke! no procedures, no chemistry, no additives. just nature doing its thing, gorwing a plant. and humans doing thir thing, using what the earth has to offer to better themselves.

Cannabis plants were here before Man. Man made beer. Who do you trust?

Do we really want cannabis users clogging up our courts and prisons?

No.

Decriminalise cannabis.

It seems the vast majority of British people want it legalised.

Is that not reason enough?

After working 9-5 in a mundane job, doing my part as an anonymous cog in the economy and paying my taxes - I can't tell you how offensive it is to me that the Government will deny me so simple and relatively harmless a vice as cannabis. What stings even more is that those same taxes that they take from me are wasted on police and court time (and occasionally jail time) enforcing the prohibition.

Prohibition of cannabis and other proscribed substances is an infringement on civil liberties, creates and sustains a black market and associated criminality and ultimately punishes the poorest and most vulnerable sections of society. It is an economic, social and moral mistake.

I personally do not fell that Cannabis is a substance that needs to be controlled in the way it does. I think that alcohol creates more problems in society and is supposedly not as bad as Cannabis hence it's legality. I find this hypocritical and don't see any problem with people who use Cannabis. I can't see it being a greater problem over the problems that come from alcohol and if anything it creates far fewer probelms.
The trade is going to continue regardless and there is nothing that can be done about it so they may as well tax it and have it "out in the open" and remove the criminal associations for good.
  
I have known several people to use it from the older generation in the 60s through to now and have never seen it become a "gateway" drug although I'm sure that it can be for some people but that is probably more to do with the personality of the user than the substance in question.

Some people have used it and as they've got older stopped using it and then some people are addicted to it much like other things but addictions are usually the result of something much greater than the specific condition that the person is addicted to.

In the long term anything done to excess can create problems but I don't see that as a legitimate reason to ban something.
As per the recent Drugs Advisory Council classification Alcohol and Tobacco does far more harm and it is contradictory for these substances to be legal when something like Cannabis isn't.

This shows how out of date the laws are and a proper investigation needs to happen and people need to vote based on the facts rather than their own preconceived opinions or personal preferences.

"More than 30,000 people were admitted to hospital with alcohol poisoning in England in 2007-08 (13,400 men and 16,700 women) – that’s more than 500 every week.
157 people died from accidental alcohol poisoning in England in 2007."
http://www.drinkaware.co.uk/[…]/acute-alcohol-poisoning

There are no cases of death by cannabis poisoning.

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs annual report 08/09 states:
"The report concludes that whilst the causal link between cannabis, psychotic symptoms and schizophrenia is undeniable, evidence for its strength is unclear. The most likely situation is that cannabis – in the population as a whole – plays only a modest role in the development of these conditions."
"The report notes that there is little evidence that demonstrates cannabis is a significant cause of acquisitive crime or anti-social behaviour."
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/[…]/annual-report-2008-09?view=Binary
The Council (Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs) is required under the Misuse of Drugs Act “to keep under review the situation in the United Kingdom with respect to drugs which are being or appear to them likely to be misused and of which the misuse is having or appears to them capable of having harmful effects sufficient to constitute a social problem”.
There are no statistics showing the rise of mental illness following the rise of cannabis use over the last 40 years in the UK. There is little evidence of cannabis causing crime and antisocial behaviour. Who exactly is being protected by these laws?

"In 2005 most cannabis resin and herbal cannabis seizures weighed between one and 500 grams (83 per cent and 78 per cent respectively)."
http://www.drugscope.org.uk/[…]/seizures2005.pdf
So police spend a lot of time going after users and low end dealers whilst the larger suppliers and importers (organised criminals/gangsters) profit.

Cannabis prohibition helps organised crime and no one else.

In a free society should we not be able to choose what we consume as individuals? I don't argue that cannabis does no harm, but as vices go its much less harmfull than alcohol.
"There is little evidence that demonstrates cannabis is a significant cause of acquisitive crime or anti-social behaviour." could you say that about alcohol?
The police and the C.P.S. spend a lot of our taxes arresting/prosecuting/jailing otherwise law-abiding citizens because of cannabis possesion. It helps police meet their targets whilst they fail to deal with gangsters who control the supply.
The criminalisation of cannabis is a massive waste of police time, tax, an unjustifiable infringement on the citizens freedom and only futhers the interests of violent gangsters. Legalise cannabis.

The way goverments deal with Cannabis, ignoring medical evidence, ignoring the Dutch system that has proved a success and generally backing laws which are obviously out of date, counter productive and wrong, is part of the reason so many people have such a low regard for the goverment.

It's very rare that I meet someone who is actively dislikes cannabis. Plenty of people I know choose not to smoke it, but are never offended by it.

Today, smoking cannabis is accepted by most of the middle class as about as bad as smoking cigarettes.

The majority of people, smokers or not, understand that wasting all this time and money on something that everyone thinks should be legal is ridiculous.

Do the right thing.

How dare steviedj equate cannabis use with paedophilia? This asinine comment is representative of Prohibitionist ignorance. The clear and obvious difference between cannabis use and molesting children is that the first harms nobody. The pompous comment that 'decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical' is in itself nonsense. Presumably, steviedj is unaware that cannabis is the safest and most versatile natural medicine in existence?

The results of the extended Dutch experiment in tolerating soft drugs are clearly delineated in official studies, which have greater statistical integrity than similar studies conducted under Prohibition. This Government would be well advised to carefully consider that fewer Dutch teenagers smoke dope than in they do in the UK and that the average age of first use of cannabis in the Netherlands is rising, whereas here it's going the other way.

The main problem with the Dutch model is that it doesn't go far enough. I suggest that any similar initiative in the UK must first address the issue of wholesale supply.

The illegality of cannabis is the cause of most of its problems.
Making it illegal means that you have to buy it from people who aren't going to ID you, and who don't have any qualms about offering harder drugs. Illegality makes cannabis a gateway drug, the same as legality means that alcohol is not a gateway drug.

To keep something illegal when it is scientifically proven that it is much less dangerous (along with LSD, MDMA and Psylocybe mushrooms) than nicotine and alcohol is a massive misuse of legislation. The government should aim to protect the public's health, not legislate morality.

"That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others" - John Stuart Mill

I've never taken cannabis (not for lack of opportunity) and never intend to. But I agree it should be legalised. Let's raise taxes instead of benefiting criminals and wasting money on pointless policing. I don't think usage would go up because anyone who wants it now can get it.

The illegality of cannabis is just gifting millions of pounds to criminals. What is this law protecting the public against?

i can do nothing but agree with all the positive comments above,

I am 25 i'm have a sucessful career in IT and smoke cannabis on a daily basis, i consider myself a useful member of society i pay my taxes, lead a full social life and have never harmed anyone by smoking a PLANT.

I simply can't believe that the UK is so far behind the times on this subject some many other areas of the world have had this same realisation and have been inteligent enough to realise the truth, why did liebour both employing Professor Nutt if all they were going to do was oust him for simply telling the truth of his findings.

The facts of the matter are that
1. The UK is skint and this seems like a great new revenue stream (i wouldn't mind paying duty and VAT on it nor would any other of the productive and creative smokers that i know)
2. It is proven far less harmful than Alcohol (which i believe is class A albeit legal please don't quote me if i am wrong)
3. It doesn't cause other social issues like Alcohol (i.e. fighting and criminal damage on a saturday night like drunks do)
4. It would stimulate business in a variety of areas and create new JOBS!

I say ban Alcohol and see how the tables would turn!!

This seems to have turned it a right old rant but i don't think i am alone in these feelings.

The arguments are so well rehearsed and numerous in favour of legalisation. The only real question is: Is anyone taking this website seriously? Is anyone really listening? Let's see. Hate to be cynical so I'm posting a comment and voting anyway.

It's not what we know but how we can get our point across in a way people take notice. Maybe if we keep adding comments until we fill up hundreds of servers with FREE THE WEED!

FREE THE WEED!

If all us users were incapable of keeping down jobs and went round robbing old ladies maybe it should be illegal.
We are not, we all go to work and I've never robbed an old lady.

Decriminalisation - google these questions.

1) How namy deaths per year in the UK from Alcohol, Fags, Class-A drugs, horse riding, driving, cannabis?
2) How much does Alcohol, cannabis abuse cost the NHS per year?
3) How many people in the UK use cannabis?
4) what percentage of the prison population is there because of the current drug laws?
5) Would you rather bump into someone who has been drinking Stella all night or someone who is stoned?
6) If usage is increasing does that mean prohibition is working?
7) What happened with alcohol prohibition in the US and what was the result of legalisation?
8)What are the prison sentences for rape, cannabis cultivation (personal not commercial)

TBH The answer is simple.

If you make something illegal you relinquish your rights to regulate it, then criminals will sell it, they wont care who to, they wont care about the purity, they wont care about the violence - they just care about the profit, there is obviously a large demand and big money to be made otherwise they wouldn't bother doing it.

Legalise, regulate & educate and you win on many levels

1) you remove the profit from the criminals
2) you remove users from contact with criminals
3) you remove users from pushers with hard drugs
4) you remove the health implications from contaminated weed
5) you control the age someone can buy it
6) you control the strength
7) you control the purity
8) you get the profit

We all know that cannabis can cause health issues - to say otherwise is just burying your head in the sand. But so does Alcohol and just about any other substance you care to mention even peanuts.

But for the majority of users the worst side-effect is getting caught & getting criminalised.

Don't press the Add Comment button more than once, it will work it's just sloooow

You know it makes sense just look at Holland see how much they earn from taxes etc from coffee shops and tourism the current situation is ludicrous putting people in prison for growing a herb . We used to have to grow centuries ago by law , oh the irony !

Nick if you get a chance please remind the PM I am the chap who wrote to him 2007 after he said some positive comments with regard cannabis, 2 weeks later my home was raided by the Police ( bit of a coincidence I thought )I was sent to prison for cultivation of cannabis with alleged intent to supply lost my home of 20 years as a result it has had a massive impact on my life and still does to this day.
Victims nobody ,cost to society probably a few hundred grand.
Even the Police know it is pretty harmless particularly compared to alcohol but until the law is changed what can they do ?
So please FREE THE WEED.

No Government has the right to penalise me for the substance I put into my own body. If I want to ingest bleach, sulphuric acid, even formaldehyde, substances that would probably kill me, I am free to do so and not incur a criminal penalty. Why is it that I cannot, if I so wish, ingest a natural plant - either by smoking, vaporising or making butter and cooking with it - that cannot be overdosed on and IF I am harming myself isn't that MY responsibility?

A look at Transforms 'After The War On Drugs: Blueprint for Regulation' http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm for an insight as to what we COULD achieve here.

Portugal decriminalised cannabis in 2001 the Cato Institute carried out a report into their progress last year: http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/greenwald_whitepaper.pdf

Please let's stop the madness of leaving control of cannabis in the hands of organised gangs, allowing, even encouraging the huge profits they are receiving by forcing the price up. The demand will not go away and we will NEVER have a cannabis free country or a cannabis free world, it has been there since mankind came into being. Demand is not determined by the law it is determined by social attitude.

The idea that young people are protected from the effects of cannabis while there is a free for all in its production, sale and use is frankly laughable, it's easier for under 16's to obtain than alcohol or tobacco. Doesn't that say something to you?

Please, can we have some evidence based drug policy as promised before the election and as laid down by the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971?

Thank you.

I support this proposal, even though I would actually like to see all drugs legalised for adult use. This would be a step in the right direction, although I really do believe legalisation is far superior since it also resolves the issues of organised crime at the supply end of things, and it ensures the product is properly regulated to ensure its safe.

I would also like to see a real effort to educate people, but in a sensible way (propaganda is counter productive) that it is not without risk though. I would especially like to see a sensible discussion on the different strains of cannabis, and now that a choice is open for people, using the strongest strains may be a bad idea in the long-term, and why.

When used properly I would say marijuana actively has benefits that alcohol does not. It can be spiritual and it can stimulate academic thought and/or creativity for many people, and for that reason alone, a blanket ban is a breach of civil liberty.

I also believe that cannabis should be decriminalised along the same line as the netherlands, it would reduce the impact of drug dealers and crime. Alcohol is legal and it causes more violent crime and deaths than any other drug available.
decriminalise it BUT tax it heavily as it can cause mental problems so should be carefully monitored

"Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - Abraham Lincoln (December 1840)

The only reason cannabis was made illegal in the USA (and then the rest of the world followed), was because a new machine invented meant that paper made from marijuana was a lot cheaper than cotton based paper - and the big business magnates in the cotton and newspaper industries in the US didn't like that so they leaned on government, who then legislated against it.

Cannabis has so many commercial and medicinal uses, that governments should be actively researching it for more uses and growing cannabis that has been GM'ed to remove THC...just like the Dutch have been developing GM'ed plants to increase THC (eg Skunk).

And, of course, it should be allowed for recreational use - get a lot of those binge drinkers off the streets where they cause fights and trouble etc. And you should be allowed to grow 2 or 3 plants at home for personal use.

The money situation alone should persuade government to legalise it - the billions wasted by the Police and courts etc trying to deal with it...and that waste would be replaced with a very good earner for the government in extra taxes on the sale of cannabis (and seeds).

It's a complete no brainer that it should be made legal...

And everyone should read this site...
http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis.shtml

It is really very interesting...

For everyone who says "cannabis causes metal health problems", what do they say to the users of Alcohol who also suffer the same and arguable in greater numbers?

Alcohol is addictive and heavy users become violent.

Cannabis is not addictive and heavy users become docile.

Also, it doesn't reduce the will to work. I work 48 hours a week and take home well above the high tax bracket, saying it makes you lazy and crazy is a cop out which is not based on science.

Completely agree with decriminalisation/taxation/control etc. People don't seem to be able to argue against the evidence that points towards it being a good idea without resorting to blatant attacks on people as "filthy druggies".

My judgement is not impartial at all but I believe what I choose to do with my own body is my own decision. If I want to destroy it will an excessive use of alcohol I can, if I want to risk my health with tobacco I can, so surely if I want to ‘risk’ my health and mind with the use of cannabis I can (well I can’t)

I simply do not see who it is hurting, ah you say its giving money to the criminal underworld and helping fund international terrorism, and whys that? Because I have to buy it from a dodgy bloke, not a licensed, moderated and quality controlled shop or company! (and its all home grown now so no terrorism).

At the end of the day it is a NON TOXIC, naturally growing PLANT! So this plant is illegal and you must not have it! Number of fatal overdoes from THC, CBD (the 2 main good things in cannabis) none recorded.

Its amazing that I can legally (as I am of age) go out to a shop, pub, club etc and buy enough alcohol to either kill myself, someone else or just smash everything up I see, for no good reason, other than being blind drunk. The amount of money being spent by the police forces, NHS and business (through damages and people off work hung-over) must go into the billions each year. How many times have police been called out up and down the country because of bar fights, parties getting out of hand and drunk and disorderly persons and that’s all legal! Now compare that to the number of smoking ‘parties’ or ‘gatherings’ that get out of control!

Where as cannabis it is illegal to have a quiet, chilled out, relaxed smoke with a few friends. Not even having enough will power to go out and start a fight. Not to mention the amount of tax payer money that is being spend pursuing, prosecuting cannabis users.

I think with a regulated and monitored market the commercial aspects are massive. With Independently Regulated growing companies and Independently Shops the influx of jobs, taxes and revenue would be very beneficial to the country.

I have not yet seen an anti-cannabis argument that did not full flat on its face when cross examined by someone who is knowledgeable in that area.

Clearly many drugs could be decriminalized and should be decriminalized if for no other reason than to save money.

My brother died because of the drug laws. If drugs were decriminalised they would be available in a safe form from trusted sources and my brother would still be alive today.

Cannabis is one of the safest substances known to mankind - huge effort has been made by vested interests to 'prove' that it is harmful and the best they can come up with is the utter tripe that it can cause mental illness, which has been utterley dicredited - in a tiny minority of people (less than have side effects from asparin etc.) it can aggravate already existing conditions. The law is an ass.

This is hardly blazing a trail is it..
its been legalised in a dozen countries for over a decade
previous governments have commission studies that were then ignore because it didn't support the prohibition

I hope this coalition has the integrity and tenacity to press for real reforms in all aspects of civil life

For the whole "gateway" argument, I would remind you that correlation is not causation

I would also pointedly remind the Tory party of its past penchant for drugs and prostitutes and take this opportunity to make it clear that it can't be one rule for the powerful and one rule for the rest

the economic problems that are both a driving force behind drug use and addiction usual visible effect the poorest disproportionately there are swaths of middle-upper class drug addicts who don't receive quite the same attention or stigma

Decriminalisation is a good start, but it's not enough, it's the least we can expect. The difficulty in comprehending the world-view, of someone who would say one deserves to go to jail for smoking a plant... is immense.

Even beyond that, cannabis should be legalised for at least: personal consumption, small scale distribution and small scale cultivation. There is to put it simply, no true justifiable reason for anything else. (small scale meaning enough for at least 3-4 people)

It is ludicrous that this country's government has on almost every occasion ignored it's scientific advisors when deciding drug policy. In fact, our current situation would be comical if it weren't for the tragedies that the unjustifiable drug laws in this country inflict.

The Dutch model should not be aped but can be improved upon in a number of ways; in particular, criminal networks still drive the supply of cannabis and other drugs.

We need to legalise, regulate and control the use of ALL drugs, particularly the most harmful and addictive ones. Prohibition has failed time and time again. It must stop, and anyone who supports it has blood on their hands.

The arbitrary prohibition of some recreational drugs, but not others, is just plain stupid. Why is cannabis prohibited, but alcohol is not? Makes no sense to me. You can smoke tobacco but you can't smoke a joint? It's absurd.

Legalize all drugs, but make sure people are educated about them, so they can make informed choices. That includes education about the harmful effects of alcohol.

It's stupid, the social damage alcohol does is much more significant that that done by cannabis smokers. No one ever got in a fight when they were stoned.

Agree cannabis should be decriminalised. The relative harm caused by this drug is VERY LOW (much lower than alcohol, for example) and would be even lower if it was not a criminal offence (and thus could be better controlled by the state).

Decriminalise imediately, should never have been banned

Agree strongly with this - I resent paying to lock up cannabis users, there are better ways to spend what little money we have available.

The war on drugs has failed, costing billions every year to enforce it. It is time to re-think the current laws.
Thousands of people are criminalised for possesion of a drug for personal use, people who are otherwise law abiding.
The Dutch have the right idea regarding cannabis, they have made the drug 'boring', and drug use amongst the Dutch is at a low, and other countries in Europe have relaxed laws, with positive results. Its time we were brave enough to do the same.

The war on drugs has failed and cost millions

The government should initiate an unbiased inquiry into the medical effects of cannabis (Both positive and negative effects) as well another unbiased inquiry into if it should be reclassified.

http://peterreynolds.wordpress.com/[…]/

The coalition government has promised to repeal "illiberal, intrusive and unnecessary" laws. There can be no better example of this than the laws against personal use and cultivation of cannabis, particularly for medicinal reasons.

Prohibition is a failed, discredited policy. Drug laws have caused hugely more harm in our world than drugs themselves. Most organised crime and nearly all street crime is caused by drug laws. Our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan fighting an enemy financed by the illegal drugs trade. Why don't we just buy the whole damn crop for the next 10 years and put the Taliban out of business?

Legalise, regulate, tax. You pull the rug from underneath organised crime. You remove the reason for.street crime. You save billions in law enforcement costs. You make billions in new tax revenue.

"After working 9-5 in a mundane job, doing my part as an anonymous cog in the economy and paying my taxes - I can't tell you how offensive it is to me that the Government will deny me so simple and relatively harmless a vice as cannabis. What stings even more is that those same taxes that they take from me are wasted on police and court time (and occasionally jail time) enforcing the prohibition."

Well said.

Unless we're going to criminalise alcohol and fags (which cause more deaths, property damage, social unrest than cannabis) then targeting cannabis only illustrates the hypocrisy and selective application of the drugs laws.

Legalise all drugs. In one stroke you remove the revenue and power base of drug dealers, eliminate the bullying and harassment activities of the police and make it far easier and safer for addicts to control their habits.

Read Ben Elton's <i>High Society</i>.

I echo the sentiments of many others here.

I've said this in the programme for government, but it's outrageous and hypocritical that it's perfectly fine to get smashed on alcohol (which is more harmful both in the short and long term) yet when some of us partake in LESS harmful and socially damaging activities - we're criminals? It's an absolute joke and needs to change.

I implore the coalition government to rate common sense above political point scoring.

I suffer severe back pain and when I can get hold of cannabis I take far less prescribed medication, cannabis enables me to lead a more normal life.
What sucks is I have to mix with the criminal element in order to obtain my preferred medication.
I am made to be a criminal because I have a disability, this is surely effecting my human rights.
I want to be able to get hold of quality cannabis and to know that the money made on it isn't going to criminal gangs.

"The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world."
- Carl Sagan quote on Marijuana

ALL problems associated with Cannabis in the UK are caused by it's illegality.

Gateway to other drugs: Only through illegality.

Mental Health issues: Caused by Polluted cannabis that is produced by criminal gangs - they don't flush their plants, they leave them full of phosphates and chemical nutrients that can cause mental health problems. NOT ONE case of so called 'Cannabis psychosis' has been found in a pure organic cannabis-only user.

Laziness and lack of motivation: Caused by the fact that criminals want the strongest affecting product as people think it is better, whereas the right kinds of Cannabis are used to increase motivation and work rates (field workers in Africa, West Indies, carribean etc. - pure Sativa strains, they do not make you lazy at all).

Smoking: If it was legal, people would soon become educated about vaporisation which has NO smoke at all. Also, pure cannabis does not and never has and can not cause Emphysema, Brown lung or Lung Cancer. It has been shown to be preventative for Cancer as well as a cure when compounds from Cannabis are injected directly into cancerous tumours. (sources: Dr. Donald Tashkin, UCLA and Madrid study, 1974)

Legalise it. It makes sense - per capita lower use amongst teenagers, lower hard drug use, less spent on courts and police and prison (Source: Dutch Government).

What counter argument is there? Only false ones.

How can you POSSIBLY relate cannabbis use to paedophilia? Don't be absurd!

The entire drugs policy needs reviewing

Bring back David Nutt - We want an EVIDENCE BASED drugs policy.

 My idea is to get this passed so people can get self help, to combat a number of health problems , also to cut expensive medical bills from hospitals , also will cut petty crime ,also will stop an illegal billion pound industry , taking money out of the british econemy. Also it will generate money with the sale of this product .... billions can be made from this , also it is 100% green ,
Why the contribution is important

to save britain from cutting of its nose to spite its face. to help thousands of ms pats, artistis suffers , cancer , mental health prolems , adhd ... etc etc etc .

to make money for the british econemy , to cut petty crime so police can focus on the serouis crime's . like murder and child molester's .

To become a green nation also help with cloth and paper as the hemp can be used for 1000's of products.

To help britains econemy and it spending , will also stop crime lords targeting england with the drugs , when the government should be doing it for the people ,and making mass amount of money to put back in to society.

We should crimilise drugs based on the harm they cause. Cannabis cause very little harm and when it does cause harm it is only from abuse of the substance, I have never missed a day of work because of cannabis.
Alcohol clearly causes much more harm and social problems. I would much rather go into a city of stoners late at night than one full of drunk people.
If I had the choice I would choose cannabis over alcohol and I would not abuse to the point where it effected my working or home life.
At the end of the day you would probably end up with just as many people abusing cannabis as you have people abusing alcohol now. The difference is cannabis would cause less harm.

Totally agree with this, great way to raise some much needed tax money. I don't personnal smoke it however i have in the past and it never lead to another kind of drugs which is what the fear mongers tell you will always happen if someone smokes cannabis!
If people could buy an smoke it in certain areas then everyone would realise that it is actually a far less offensive drug than alcohol!

If I want to do something, who are you to say that I can't. I am an adult with my own views, my own principles and if I choose to do something then I should be allowed.

Why are the millions of people who ALREADY use cannabis being oppressed in this way. There are many well worn arguments which I shan't go trott out again as to why it should be legalized but there a couple of questions I always ask people when having this debate...

If you ask someone why they don't smoke weed/take heroin/snort coke etc the answer is always the same - because it is bad for you. NEVER does anyone answer because it is illegal. People are doing these things every day (and perhaps with the exception of heroine) are leading perfectly happy and productive lives.

There are three ways of distributing drugs. The first is pretty much as a free for all with light regulation (as per cigs and booze), the second is under tighter govt control (as with methadone) or the third option as CHOSEN by the govt, to let criminals take control of manufacture, supply and sale.

There is a demand for these things which is not affected by the legality. Cannabis is a natural, god given plant with many positives from it's consumption.

Stop the oppression and give people the respect and freedom to do what they want. Thank goodness we've got some liberals in govt. (And old DC was a toker I believe at school too. Look how well he turned out)

I think that this issue is going to be a seminal moment for the coalition (and not just the cannabis dabate) and the NC is going to go down as a legend if he follows this through. Get behind it people - is that the faint whiff of freedom around the corner...

I grew up in the Netherlands and I felt safe going to a coffee shop to get a bit of weed or hash. No need to deal with dodgy people in a dark street corner like here in the UK.
Cannabis is risk free if quality can be guaranteed and does far less harm than than alcohol and tobacco. On top of that are the scientifically proven medicinal properties of the plant which can be used to treat a few hundred conditions including chronic pain, fybomyalgia, nausea, and lack of appetite.
I favour complete legalisation via a first step of decriminalizing the use and growing of this wonderful plant.

Alcohol and violence go hand in hand judging by the state of every town centre on a friday and saturday night. I'd feel safer in a coffeeshop full of pleasantly stoned people than in a club with a few hundred drunks.

It's time to follow the examples adopted by several countries like Portugal (all drugs legal, drug use going down), Netherlands (policy of tolerance, taxed sale of cannabis, taxes raised to fund treating problem drug takers), Germany (looking at decriminalizing cannabis).

Do the right thing Nick and David, the extra money the government will inevitably gain can help the country get out of the economic downturn, add funds to the NHS, and improve education.

I would prefer to see all drugs legalised, but this would be a start.

Legalise it and tax it heavily.

how the government can possibly claim keeping cannabis illegal is beyond me.
the damage done by alcohol and cigarettes far and away outdoes cannabis.
families are destroyed by alcohol everyday, it creates violence on our streets, and costs the nhs billions every year.
no-one has ever died from cannabis, the mental health concerns are greatly over exaggerated, alcohol does far more damage.
wake up politicians, the world will never be a clean and sober place. you need to make rules that are sensible and not based on rumour and assumption, but instead on recommendations from the experts, oh wait they all quit because no-one ever listened to them! and i assume the same will be said of this whole "ask the voters" enterprise, you'll ask us, but then totally ignore us.

The government complain about how drug users use of NHS resources (though nowhere near as much as the 800,000+ alcohol users who are admitted) yet fail to recognise the fact that drugs are safe if used within a safe environment. Cannabis has no recorded fatalities and yet it is illegal. Tax could cover costs that the government are so passionate about, and it would mean an end to a lot of otherwise law-abiding people (both young and old) from being branded criminals.

Drug policy should be based on science, not years of hysteria.

Yet another thing that was rushed through by the last Government, completely disregarding all advice given.

We need more money and less criminals, this achieves that in one.

Everyone admits prohibition doesn't work - regulation and control are the only sensible way.

There is alot of hysteria when this debate appears and the media have alot to answer for this, with sensationalist scaremongering headlines which I think frighten the politicians from tackling the subject.

The main thing to put across is that decriminalisation / legalisation DOES NOT mean a free for all, quite the opposite, it is bringing the situation FROM a current free for all TO a controlled regulated market.

There is no point repeating all the other sensible and thoughtful points that have been posted so far, suffice to say , I agree with them and would like to see a proper mature debate around this issue in our country.

There is no valid reason for cannabis to be criminalised.

"Gateway Effect" has long been proven invalid and a ridiculous claim.

Most of our drug laws seem to be based on 1950's hysteria.

We lose a lot of tax money fighting this "crime".
We lose a lot of tax money from criminalising what could be a flourishing and varied industry (bigger head shops, cannabis cafes, clothing industry and the HUGE culture and community would be freer to spend their money)

I would just like to point out that cannabis is not legal in the Netherlands like yo seem to sugest, it is still illegal, however the police will turn a blind eye if it is restricted to cafes and no problems are caused.Having it on you in public is a crime, using it in public is a crime & dealing in public is a crime

The use of plants by man to effect his consciousness is no new thing, surprising as it may be to some, it has been done throughout time

Who is a man in a suit, who lives in a man made flat in london, who does an artificial 'job' moving imaginary numbers around on a man made computer, so that he can earn man made, imaginary 'pounds' to spend on factory processed rubbish, to say that a plant is ILLEGAL?!?

You are all INSANE

Plants and nature are the REAL WORLD, you are NOONE to say anything about it

I will agree, some man made chemicals probably should be illegal, heroin, crack etc are all made from processing naturally occurring things and making something else that is highly addictive and harmful

Cannabis, and psilocybin mushrooms are just as natural as you are (in fact, more so)

If they could talk, how would you feel about them declaring YOU illegal?!

Come on now, the very fact cannabis is illegal and alcohol isn't is simply an utter farce, I have seen far more damage done by alcohol, it is fairly evident that cannabis is only illegal because it expands your mind, and that's no use if you're to be kept a moronic docile slave, who would there be to fight all these wars to keep good old halliburton and co's weapons contracts on the go!! what a terrible thought eh!

I am also often annoyed by claims that 'victims' of the law are actually 'victims' of cannabis

One of my friends had to receive a caution for possessing cannabis

The policeman ran off some big speech about some foreign lady trying to smuggle weed into the country inside her dead baby

Shock tactics much?!

As will be fairly obvious to anyone with a fraction of a mind, this is nothing to do with cannabis itself, in fact, had cannabis been legally taxed and regulated in this country, there would have been no market for the woman to try and smuggle the stuff in to,

So her child was in fact, a tragic victim of our own moronic LAWS, and nothing to do with the substance itself.

Think about it for a second, you're saying this stuff is illegal to PROTECT people, then if they use it to 'protect' them further you class them as criminals!!

If it weren't so utterly contemptibly beyond stupid, it'd be hilarious

As a few people point out, cannabis isn't actually decriminalised in the Netherlands.

Really we're talking about CONTROL - not decrimninalising or legalising - and we're talking about controlling all drugs.

See Transform Drug Policy Foundation:

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/

It's just common sense, really.

Talk to Professor David Nutt - a scientist who studies these things and take his advice.

In light of it being relatively 'safe' compared to harder substances such as cocaine, I would have thought legalisation and the control that would come with it would benefit both users and the economy- after all, if legalised it would be subject to similar taxes as tobacco and thus would earn the Government far more money then further attempts to stomp it out will cost. I'd sooner cannabis users had to pay duty on weed then VAT go up any further, for example.

Drug legalisation is an absolute no-brainer. Unfortunately most governments posses no-brains. It makes far more sense than the messy prohibition we have at the moment and the harm caused by organised crime and non-controlled substances.

by lve1975 on July 02, 2010 at 11:57AM I voted for Mr Clegg and the Liberal Democrats, in part due to their policy on legalizing cannabis. We can drink alcohol which is proven to be damaging, with no restrictions whatsover if we are not driving, yet as informed adults we have been oppressed and refused acknowledgment on this issue which is important to hundreds of thousands, if not millions of UK citizens.

During the election campaign, the Lib Dem manifesto clearly set out the idea that to cultivate cannabis and pass it around consenting adults should be de-criminalised. This is their pledge, that is why I ticked their box. If the coalition government is to work succesfully, compromise must be in evidence of course, however key policies which sway voters should be examined very carefully so as not to lose credibility with the electorate.

The taxation and employment generated by adopting this policy will go a long way to assisting the much needed recovery, growers, sellers, retail outlets will all generate a fair income for the chancellor while at the same time driving the criminal gangs out of business in this area.

Many cannabis users are law abiding citizens from all walks of life, Mr Clegg himself has all but admitted using recreational drugs in the past, I know personally a doctor and a civil judge who regularly enjoy a social smoke. We are not criminls, we are affecting no one else with our pastime. The nanny state should be eroded and freedom of choice through informed debate should be encouraged.

Why the contribution is important
The Lib Dem manifesto promised this law would be revoked. Some voters, I myself a previous 15 year labour voter, chose the Lib Dems, in part to this pledge. It is important for the party to remain loyal to the electorate who put them in power and deliver the promises and pledges they set out in black and white during the election campaign.

@ fishonabike
Possession of small quantities in the Netherlands is not a criminal offence, it is classed as a misdemeanour (like traffic violations.) It is decriminalised but not legalised, there is a difference.
I believe that cannabis should be treated the same as alcohol, taxed, licensed and age restricted. That is to say make it a controlled legalised substance as opposed to a controlled decriminalised substance.

It would reduce drug crime and generate tax. It is less harmful a substance than alcohol and people will continue to smuggle and buy cannabis until it is legalised. The country ought to capitalise on the sale of it and adopt the same principle as the Netherlands. I understand that it can't be imported due to EU laws, but it could be legalised to grow in the UK, reducing the need for drug traffickers and all that they entail.

Quite right. Why have we put up with this nonsense for so long, with Alan Johnson even sacking the man who he asked for advice on this, then gave the 'wrong' answer? I'd rather share the streets with stoners than drunks, that's for sure.

I'm sick of the government telling me what I can and cannot do in my own home, with my own body and my own life. Civil liberties? Yeah right. In my opinion this is one of the main issues plaguing our society right now. We're bounded by laws with no underlying sense, and scientific evidence is just ignored.

The Netherlands are a model to us all on how to control and make revenue from the drugs and cannabis industry. To say cannabis leads people on to harder drugs is just absolutely ridiculous.

The vast majority of people I know within the ages 14-35 have smoked cannabis, and a lot of them still do. This is despite the apparent illegality of it. Thanks to the government's stance, these people are provided with cannabis either covered in glass or the disgusting skunk varieties. You think cannabis increases the risk of mental illness? So do lots of things; skunk probably does exponentially.. Well then, decriminalise it and regulate/control the strains grown and sold.

For the latter half of my life I've felt I have no say in anything this country does. To the government - legalisation is a no-brainer. The problem here is not proving that cannabis is "less harmful" or "a good source of taxes". The problem is a government who willingly ignore scientific evidence and what people actually want. Give me a choice to do what I want to do, and stop dictating ridiculous "morals" and "ethics" to me and completely disregarding scientific evidence.

This doesn't go far enough. If I was being selfish: I'd just ask for cannabis to be legalised, not decriminalised. But we need to see a worldwide end to drug prohibition.

During this economical climate decriminalising cannabis will be a good thing. For one point look at the revenue it would bring to this country. If we were to legalise cannabis, it would mean police time would be spent on more valuable matters e.g. important crimes, instead of booking people for the petty one's.

On the other hand though, People are more careful when taking it nowadays due to the reclassification of the drug, but if it was to be legal to take and posess cannabis it would be a big problem just like the drink culture in britain.

I feel that the people in Britain would not be respectful towards the legalisation of cannabis. It would be just as big as a problem as drinking.

If thew government were to legalise it i feel the best way to ensure people respect it would be by giving strict rules when to possess it. For example, you can Smoke it, but only in a cafe or in your house, Don't do it in the street or when in the pub or club.

 

Drug classification should be on scientific grounds - as the Liberal Democrats have supported for years - and not political ones. Although for most of the country cannabis is seen as 'evil', drugs are a public health issue, not a moral one. We don't want another government as like the last one where expert advice was unheeded under the empty guise of being 'tough on crime'.

I am bored of being a criminal, I'd rather pay taxes on it thank you very much and get on with the rest of my legal life.

Yes, but TAX it too. The cannabis market in the UK is worth millions, if not billions of pounds. Need to remove this ridiculous stigma that is attached to legalisation and start getting real about drug policy.

Never gonna happen with a Tory government though, the Lib Dems don't even officially endorse the policy. The stigma prevails... :(

I'm not a crinimal!
The people of Britain have spoken!
Be the first government to get it right!!
If we don't get an addequate response I suggest a full scale rally in London ...
That is of course when this peaceful protest legislation finally gets passed!

Actually, I would like to see a REFERENDUM on this. I think the government would be truly shocked to see just how many people in this country support legalisation. GET WITH THE TIMES!!!

I am bored of being a criminal, I'd rather pay taxes on it thank you very much and get on with the rest of my legal life.

Either decriminalize cannibis,or criminilize alcohol, they should be on a par. Maybe stronger strains of cannibis and alcohol should be treated differently however?

Tax it, educate people to the harms.

I should have the choice to spiff it up.

Legalise it and get rid of it's 'cool' image.

Stop people who chose to use it having to buy it off criminals (and getting other drugs pushed on to them).

Get the revenue, create the jobs, stop the huge waste of money on trying to 'stop' it's use.

The journal Schizophrenia Research published a review last September entitled “Assessing the impact of cannabis use on trends in diagnosed schizophrenia in the United Kingdom from 1996 to 2005.”

It was expected, if cannabis use causes psychoses, that due to an increase in use preceding the dates examined, the rate of psychoses would increase.

The prediction of increase in psychoses is here (Addiction, April 2007):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17362293

It makes sense that if cannabis causes psychoses, the rate would fluctuate according to the use of it.

They found no such thing, the rate remained constant. The cohort was 600,000 UK patients per year.

The only conclusion is that cannabis use does not increase the rate of psychoses.

Here’s the abstract from PubMed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900

A recent systematic review concluded that cannabis use increases risk of psychotic outcomes independently of confounding and transient intoxication effects. Furthermore, a model of the association between cannabis use and schizophrenia indicated that the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia would increase from 1990 onwards. The model is based on three factors: a) increased relative risk of psychotic outcomes for frequent cannabis users compared to those who have never used cannabis between 1.8 and 3.1, b) a substantial rise in UK cannabis use from the mid-1970s and c) elevated risk of 20 years from first use of cannabis. This paper investigates whether this has occurred in the UK by examining trends in the annual prevalence and incidence of schizophrenia and psychoses, as measured by diagnosed cases from 1996 to 2005. Retrospective analysis of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) was conducted for 183 practices in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The study cohort comprised almost 600,000 patients each year, representing approximately 2.3% of the UK population aged 16 to 44. Between 1996 and 2005 the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia and psychoses were either stable or declining. Explanations other than a genuine stability or decline were considered, but appeared less plausible. In conclusion, this study did not find any evidence of increasing schizophrenia or psychoses in the general population from 1996 to 2005.

 Posted by steviedj July 01, 2010 at 07:49AM
Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical.

-------------

Don't be silly, your opinion that cannabis use is a "problem" is wrong, thus your entire argument is invalid.

Cannabis is a natural product and should be available to those adult who choose to use it, much like tobacco and alcohol.

This argument really exasperates me. Legalising cannabis would reduce crime, both through drug convictions and removing funding from crimial supplies, increase awareness, health and research into cannabis, since legalisation would allow people to actually TELL their doctor they smoke it without worrying etc. It would hugely increase government money by saving money on prisons, courts, police, anti-drug advertising etc, and also by tax revenue, its dirt cheap to produce and could easily be taxed heavily same as alcohol or cigarettes.

This coupled with the fact that cannabis has NOT been shown to cause mental illness (just because more people with mental illness smoke it doesn't mean it CAUSES the mental illness), and has not been implicated as the sole cause of a single death ever! compare that with alcohol and tobacco which directly and solely cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands a year. I honestly can't fathom why its illegal other than politicians pathetic petty power struggles and misconceptions.

Newsflash: your ignorance is no need for me to stop doing something I enjoy, which is a far better alternative to getting drunk which I hate but used to do before I started smoking cannabis. Also, I am very highly educated, have a degree and phd, and have worked in neuroscience and cancer research for many years. Smoking cannabis certainly never demotivated me to not achieve and not work.

I could keep ranting but I'm sure you've all stopped listening :)

I'm very sorry, don't know how those multiple posts happened, note to moderators - include a delete post function!

The more dangerous a drug, the more important it is that it isn't controlled by criminals.

The fact that addiction is treated as a legal problem rather than a health problem is one of the great disgraces of the 20th century - easily on a par with the inquisitions in terms of how much damage it has done.

We should be emulating Amsterdam, we should be emulating Portugal - where, incidentally, crime and drug use have gone down - as reported by the BBC.

We won't hear this story from people who's jobs depend on the "war on drugs" continuing of course - but these people are liars, and beyond contempt.

Bring back hanging for drug suppliers and automatic life sentences at hard labour for drug users.

reasons? all of the above.

It is mind-boggling to me that alcohol and cigarettes can be bought in a supermarket by anyone over age, yet cannabis is illegal. Most people would use it in a similar way to alcohol, and it is less damaging to your health as well as less likely to make you violent. It would also take the legs out from under the illegal drug trade - if cannabis is legally available, who would go to dodgy areas and deal with criminals?

Ultimately there is only one way to find out if legalising cannabis will work, and that's to try it. It can always be made illegal again later.

Thanks for taking the time to post your idea.
Your idea is similar to one we have already received.
To keep the discussion going in the one place, please add your comments to the original idea at:

• http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/legalise-and-tax-cannabis

When compared to alcohol and smoking, Cannabis is much less lethal, yet the latter remains illegal whilst the other two are legal and regularly consumed.

This isn't from the biased view of a cannabis smoker either, I have never touched the stuff.

The Netherlands model works perfectly and I can't remember hearing any horror stories about cannabis either here or in NL; actually… there was one: the sacking of Professor Nutt. Much-needed revenue could easily be raised from taxation.

Does nobody else think the first comment is completely ignorant and ill-relevant? If coffee, tobacco, alcohol, prescription drugs and fast food are 'legal' and therefore 'government approved' how in the democratic land of Great Britain can cannabis - a natural product, causing no less mind altering reactions than my list above - be illegal and 'government disapproved'?:

 Posted by steviedj July 01, 2010 at 07:49AM
Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical.

The dutch system would work perfectly fine in the UK. We are not criminals and don't deserve to be treated as second class citizens. As adults i think we have the right to choose how we live our life, and not be scared of what people think or might happen to us due to outdated laws.

Legalising is the only way.

legalise canabis and stop treating the thousands of people who use this for medicinal purposes [to releave pain] like criminals

I would extend this policy to all drugs; we need to get the sale and distribution of drugs out of the criminal hands. It funds war, just look at Afganistan where 70% of their funding comes from growing and selling Opium TO US!!!!!!

its about time the government admitted to our drugs problem in the country and legalise them all....only by admitting the problem can we deal with it....the amount of different powders and pills that are available from the dodgy people is growing...i use cannabis but am frighted by all the new stuff available to my kids and others..you will never stop it but by legalising it you could help everyone make informed decisions on what they take rather than buying dodgy stuff full of i dont know what...
ohh and the first coment on this page comaring cannabis use to peadophiles...is just plain stupid....

It is a blatant injustice that alcohol is entirely legalm while cannabis is criminal. There is no logical or scientific basis for this difference - it is entirely due to culture. It's time for this to be seriously considered; the government needs to have the courage to stand up to narrow-minded Daily Mail readers who mindlessly equate "Drugs" with crime while ignoring the fact that one of the biggest problems in our society is caused by alcohol.

The whole David Nutt saga was and is a travesty, people, in a free country should have the right to do what they want to their bodies, so long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others.

Look people, those who want to have cannabis will get it anyway, it's 1 or 2 degrees of separation away really for most people.

I don’t smoke cannabis but would like to see it decriminalised. Why should the government waist mine and your tax money stopping a person doing something that is a victimless crime.
 
Also prohibition of drugs doesn’t work, as it didn’t for alcohol in the USA in the 20s. Making these things illegal creates black-markets and criminals out of ordinary people, and ultimately costs every tax payer money unsuccessfully trying to stop people.

Also if you think it is even possible to stop people taking drugs, your deluded. If we can’t stop people taking drugs in our prisons, how can’t we expect to stop people taking them in their own homes?

I’m sorry for those people who don’t like others taking drugs, but its time you just got used to it! Throughout history and the world over human beings like taking drugs, and that fact isn’t going to be change by a few unenforceable laws!

Good, we are back in business.

I had to email the site admins several times to get this thread unlocked.....

Please spread the work to your friends to post in this thread and the Legalase & tax threads instead of creating loads of small pro cannabis ones - the threads with the highest number of posts will be on the front page and will gain more attention.

Back to the argument....

Drugs can be bad for you - legal and illegal, I know people hooked on prescription drugs and I know someone with a Class-A addiction (but he holds down a job and isn't driven to commit crimes) and I have had issues with getting-off a prescription drug.

This should not be a moral, political or religious argument, we live in the 21st century it should be based purely on science.

If a whole load of independent scientists said it was dangerous and it should be "controlled" then fair enough but they dont. They say "it is less damaging than alcohol" but that is legal so its ok?

The current system is wrong, it is so broken it cannot be fixed.

The Chinese chemists will keep tweeking their synthetic "legal highs" to get round the current laws and we do not know what damage those chemicals can do.

We criminalise users when for most of them it is a harmless passtime and others with problems would be better off being treated as victims under the health system rather than making it worse by giving them a criminal record which will affect work prospects and in some cases make them turn to crime.

Cannabis is an organic substance, there are historic documentats showing it's use for cures as well as recreation.

All the Hype about "Skunk" is media & prohibition driven - if somthing is illegal then criminals will create the strongest, most addictive, profitable substnces they can. If it was Decrininalised then that all goes away.

There will be freedom of choice, there will be no persicution.

Here is an example of how the dutch model compares to the UK.

In the UK you go to a criminal who is possibly armed and usually has Class-A drugs as well you buy some Cannaibs of unknown quality/strength/effect (probably Skunk or Cheeze)and you hope you don't get caught in possession it and that it's not contaminated with glass, sand or anything else nasty to make it weigh more.

In Holland you go to a coffeeshop ask the bud-tender what they have in stock, there will be a menu with the name, strength, effects & price. You can ask questions and you will get truthfull answers and the purity & quality is controlled. You can then smoke it in the coffeeshop and the staff know what to do it you over-do it.

This has not resulted in a huge increase in drug use (Drug usage has gone down), it has not resulted in the youth becoming zombies (lots think it's boring and do not smoke it).

I know I have some dutch friends and discussed this at length last time I was over there. They were more upset over the drunken English "Stag do's" that flooded their beutiful city every Friday night (I was so embarrased to be English).

Posted by daveh July 02, 2010 at 02:39PM
Bring back hanging for drug suppliers and automatic life sentences at hard labour for drug users.

----------------------

There's always one isn't there?

@ steviedj you cannot possibly relate cannabis to something so vile and evil.

a word in the ear of all the daily mail readers
£19+++BILLOIN spent every single year do you enjoy paying taxes to fight somehting that can never be won? is not better to relax the laws on personal use and make money while doing it? rather than throwing £19++ billoin a year into an unwinable fight?

Is not a better idea to use that money to improve health care police on the streets housing repay the uk's massive debt while also gaining more and more from a market that is underground at this time feeding milloins into the hands of REAL criminals who infict pain and suffering the length and bredth of the uk?

Although the situation in the Netherlands is better than outright prohibition, full legalisation (quality control and tax) is required. In the Netherlands the production and importation of cannabis is still illegal - a silly situation, where the supply is still controlled by criminals (who possibly have other connections outside of drugs) and the distribution is a grey area. Much better to fully legalise.

So the debate is becoming a bit steriotypical. lets put things straight.

I earn a significant sallery, I own my house, I have no debts, no criminal record, I pay all my bills & taxes on time, I have been in full time employment since I graduated nearly 30 years ago.

And Mr "Daily Mail reader" wants to lock me up for life for having a joint - GET REAL!

It is stupendious beyond belief that an otherwise law-abiding adult I could be criminalised & loose my job etc for smoking a plant.

I don't want to buy it from criminals.
I don't want to fund organised crime.
I don't want it being sold on the street corners where I live.
I don't want the violence drug gangs bring.
I don't want my kids being offered it outside the school gates.

I want it regulated and put into the hands of licensed outlets.
I want my kids educated about the harms all foods/drugs can do (fatty foods, alcohol, tobacco, cannabis the lot) Knowledge is the key.
I want the police catching the people flooding our streets with heroin/cocaine not the people using cannabis (as they are the victims of this trade).

But most of all I want a belivable, enforcable drugs policy based on scientific evidence not on tabloid hysteria.

I agree with everybody saying that legalisation is far superior to decriminalisation since it takes the drug out of the hands of organised criminals.

In reality, decriminalising would take cannabis out of the hands of criminals, it could be supplied responsibly and produced with regulations. It can be taxed (although I don't support the idea of heavy taxing as a social control), it will reducde the amount spent trying to control cannabis. People often refer to cannabis as a 'gateway drug'. I would pose that having to purchase it illegally probably opens a greater link to other drugs than using it. People could buy and use vapourising equipment more easily, which means that most of the harmful effects caused by the smoking of the cannabis are nullified. Driving under the influence of cannabis would be the same as drink-driving, effectively. People don't die from the use of cannabis. In general, I think the proponents of keeping cannabis illegal are simply stuck in a mindset, and not looking at the facts.

(Full disclosure: Have never smoked a cigarette or used cannabis in my life.)

Note to the moderator, It looks like you have listened to the comments on having closed threads on this issue down, and have re-opened some that are offering slightly different arguments about the issue of cannabis. Thank you.

I think that Cannabis should be legalized because it will have so many benefits on our country.

I will list the reasons below.

Cannabis has MANY proven health benefits. It can help several problems/illnessess Search google and you will finds thousands of information.
Legalization and Taxation of Cannabis will cut our national Debt in a year.
It keeps the money in the country instead of in the hands of thugs and murderers.
Amsterdam style coffeeshops would keep drug use under control.
A very high percentage of crimes from murders to muggings are because of illegal drug dealing. if this was eliminated then we would have a lot more safer streets. (This includes all drugs not just cannabis)
Myself and other cannabis users are constantly being stereotyped. We are not lazy layabouts. We are not criminals or murderers. We are humans and should be able to do this along with our everyday life.
Legalizing Cannabis would also reduce people going to harder drugs the reason I say this is because when your going to buy cannabis from a shop you dont have the persausive drug dealers pressuring you to buy.
It will also form several jobs
There are plenty of other reasons why it should be legalized all the way through to the hemp industry. Oil Clothing Food plenty of other things.

Give us a chance and you will see how much the country will improve greatly. More freedom more relaxed more happier.... = more hardworking people

I second what pahkola said...thank you moderators.

I'm in favour of legalisation. Anyone who wants to use pot can easily find it, those who don't want to, don't have to.
• The arguements about it being a gateway drug don't hold water. There are so many professional people and skilled people who use pot recreationally. A small part of our population has addictive problems with sex, drugs, tellie, gambling etc and its not right to punish otherwise law abiding citizens for their problems
• It could generate a huge tax revenue
• The schizophrenia arguement may be true for a minutely small percentage of the population but most people who use pot don't have any problem
• There are safe ways to smoke it (eg a vapouriser) and even safer is eating it.
• The American experience in Calif and Colorado and the Portugeese and Dutch experience show that the world doesn't suddenly come to an end if people can use pot recreationally
• By taking drugs out of the criminal world you reduce crime and the money given to criminal organisations. This is reason enough to decriminilise.

Please decriminalise, regulate and tax the sale of cannabis products.

At the present time I am legally entitled to choose to imbibe alcohol and tobacco. But not cannabis. All 3 are natural products which cause a level of harm to the user but not to others when used responsibly (let's put passive smoking and the dangers of drink driving etc aside for a second).

It is simply a consumer preference. Why is the state wasting time and and money persecuting people who imbibe cannabis products ? You might as well jail people for preferring cornflakes to all-bran !

Also I would like to make a point regarding the regulation of legal cannabis. At present young people have nothing to prevent them taking up cannabis under the age at which they can legally smoke and drink. Putting the drug under control would mitigate this to some extent at least.

The decriminalisation of cannabis would relieve some of the pressure on the prison and judicial systems, free the police to focus on real crime, and produce a wealth of tax income for the state to reinvest. How often do you find money growing on trees ? It is literally there for the taking.

In conclusion, many people cite the dangers of cannabis. They are no more serious than the dangers of alcohol, tobacco, or even high fat / high sodium food. Everything in moderation should be the watchword.

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss this, and other issues openly and constructively.

I forgot to mention Coffeeshops - So now I will..

The government are cutting the public sector, this will result in job losses (large numbers of job losses) these need to be replaced by something.

If Cannabis was decriminalised or legalised then a whole support infrastructure would be required.

Licensed coffeeshops, grow shops for people who want to grow their own at home, quality control labs, inspectors & people to grant licenses the list goes on and on.

It could create tens of thousands of jobs (especially if you adopt the Dutch model where a coffeeshop cannot sell alcohol & pubs cannot sell cannabis).

I'd seriously consider opening one & employing some people if it was allowed.

Prohabition has been an Utter Failure we need change fast!

First I don't see how the government can justify the legal enterprise of alcohol and tobacco when both kill far more both directly and indirectly than cannabis does on its own.

If we can legalise death warranting drugs then we may as well legalise a fun and harmless one. Think of the extra revenue, the control and the fact that you don't have to deal with those drug dealers who aren't the most pleasant of characters.

* Cannabis use is so common that current laws are unworkable. We know the only risk (over-eating). Let us make our own choices.

* Cannabis is a harmless drug. Cannabis is not a gateway drug. Only an idiot would outlaw it.

* Taking cannabis is a victimless crime. Criminalising cannabis is draconian, barbaric and retarded, and causes far more harm than good.

* Locking up cannabis users who are actually dependent on it is cruel and inhumane. We should be assisting, not criminalising them.

* Cannabis is nowhere near as dangerous as tobacco or alcohol, yet they are legal and cannabis is not.

* Legalising cannabis would eradicate the black market and associated crime, enabling the government to regulate the supply.

* Under the current law, those who want cannabis have to go to dealers. This may bring them into contact with harder drugs and stained furniture.

* Prohibition encourages drug-taking because the thrill of illegality attracts young people.

* An end to prohibition would generate billions in tax revenue.

* Legalising cannabis allows the police to deal with actual crimes, and frees up courts and prisons.

* The law is out of touch with public opinion. Most people are in favour of legalising cannabis.

* The use of cannabis has always been as widespread as it is today. Queen Victoria used it. Queen Elizabeth and Prince Harry.

@pahkola
We appreciate the postive feedback.
Thanks

@steviedj It is a straw man to compare smoking cannabis to paedophilia or theft, someone smoking a joint doesn't do harm in the way that either of these do.

For the vast majority of people who use cannabis, it is a relatively harmless pleasure. Indeed for most people, including me, it is something we tried in our youth but then moved on from. On the whole the law should protect us from the actions of others, but should not interfere with an adult's freedom to treat our own bodies as we choose, and to take small risks with our own lives when nobody else is affected, and this surely includes the right to smoke a joint in our own home.

A closed thread that was merged into this said "End 'fascistic' persecution of cannabis users". So if strict enforcement of cannabis laws is a trait of right-wing governments then cannabis must have been legal in the USSR? Are people saying it's OK to smoke pot in Cuba & North Korea?

The dopey idea that cannabis causes less harm than alcohol is only because people can't smoke cannabis in places where they can drink alcohol! Cannabis would cause a lot more harm on a level playing field. No-one devlops psychosis because they have a pint of beer or glass of wine every day!

Lots of 100-year-old say their long life is due to drinking wine or beer. I have never heard ANYONE put long life down to smoking cannabis!

Fat lot of good it's done the Netherlands. Now the whole of Amsterdam has a seedy feel and you walk around like there is a dark culture waiting to mug you round every corner... oh wait, there is! If you hippies want to waste your useless lives taking drugs then go to Holland and do it and leave Britain to the hard-working, conscientious and decent citizens of this once great nation.

the state should have no control over what people decide to take ,in the forms of recreational drugs, if people are aware of this health risks then it should be there decision wether or not to take a drug. Regulating the legalisation of cannabis just makes sense, people that don't want to be affiliated just don't go to the "coffee shops" this way you take it off streets and out of the hands of minors etc Drugs taboo has gone on too long

"leave Britain to the hard-working, conscientious and decent citizens of this once great nation."
I assume you are talking about the same nation that wrecks it city centers and high streets with binge drinking. Alcohol's role in a vast amount of anti-social behaviour, violence and criminal damage is easy to find in any town on any friday night.
Ask a police officer which group is harder to deal with, cannabis smokers or drunks. Ask them which group causes more antisocial behaviour and crime.

Eddie Ellison Retired Detective Chief Superintendent and former operational head of Scotland Yard's Drug Squad said to the independent newspaper in 2003:
"Today, a wide range of policing representatives, respected members of the medical profession, large sections of the British judiciary, most countries of Europe and even the majority of the polled public recognise that continuing to criminalise cannabis use is illogical, futile and entirely unjustified; only the politicians remain fearful of adopting more permissive legislation." He goes on to say, "Simultaneously, [The prohibition laws] destroy potential careers and waste precious resources within the police, judiciary and laboratories."
Chief Superintendent Kevin Morris, then the President of the Police Superintendents' Association of England and Wales said in the same article:
"I believe cannabis is a health problem rather than a legal one, and enforcement of the law, while a necessary measure, will never be a satisfactory solution."
(http://www.independent.co.u[…]is-be-legalised-537808.html)

Amsterdam is a far cleaner and safer city than London - It doesn't have a seedy feel at all.

It is very narrow minded to say that only hippies smoke cannabis, you would probably be surprised at the range of people that find it helpful.

@brerrabbit

When I lived in London, there was a pitched-battle once in Green Lanes, as two drug gangs fought over their turf. They were firing automatic weapons indiscriminatley across the street. In Kensal Green, there were regular drive by shootings as a result of drug turf wars. On reading this, your first reaction might be, there you see, that’s what drugs do. But if you stop for a second, and think about it, it is not the drugs that cause that, it is that we have allowed their supply to be in the hands of gangs. If the drugs were legal, regulated and sold through licensed suppliers, these things wouldn’t happen. I have never heard of a shoot-out between alcohol suppliers... except in the States during prohibition of course...

@ Brerrabbbit

And as another point, this is my country as much as it is yours and I am hard working and an active member of my community, so I won't go abroad thank you very much, I'll stay here!

And lets talk about Psychosis.

This is from an article by researchers in the U.S.:
"Roughly 3% of persons with alcoholism experience psychosis during acute intoxication or withdrawal. Approximately 10% of patients who are dependent on alcohol who are in withdrawal experience severe withdrawal symptomatology, including psychosis."And that “It is generally accepted that alcohol-related psychosis remits with abstinence, “
Alcohol-Related Psychosis, Author: Michael Larson, DO, Clinical Instructor, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Harvard University.

W Hall and N Solowij reported in the Lancet in 1998:
"Large doses of THC produce confusion, amnesia, delusions, hallucinations, anxiety, and agitation [I.e. psychosis]. Such reactions are rare, occurring after unusually heavy cannabis use; in most cases they remit rapidly after abstinence from cannabis."
And that although:
"There is an association between cannabis use and schizophrenia."
"A declining incidence of treated cases of schizophrenia over the period when cannabis use has increased suggests, however, that cannabis use is unlikely to have caused cases of schizophrenia that would not otherwise have occurred."
Adverse effects of cannabis, Wayne Hall, Nadia Solowij
THE LANCET Vol 352 November 14, 1998

Decriminalising isn't enough, it should be fully legal (on par with tabaco and alcohol) and that will take the crime out of the drug completely.

Prohibition dosn't work..lets try a new aproach.

mwe152 wrote:
"The dopey idea that cannabis causes less harm than alcohol is only because people can't smoke cannabis in places where they can drink alcohol!"

----------------

So people can't use cannabis in their homes, where they can drink alcohol?

We have 24 hour drinking and we have a free for all where cannabis is concerned already so where is all this harm it's going to cause...don't you think we would've seen it already?
 

To: mwe152 regarding psychosis and your comment that alcohol doesn't cause this;

I find this sentiment highly irresponsible, of course alcohol causes psychosis, there is a DIRECT link to alcohol psychosis, as opposed to the "casual link" that every right wing newspaper has to admit through gritted teeth of cannabis psychosis. Having read every report and medical journal I can find over the last few years, I would like to inform you of the following-

The variables of cannabis psychosis have to be: "of developing mind, other contributing environmental factors, and profuse use." These are unconditional factors that every study has to concede. Even people that have had problems with cannabis admit to this, cannabis plays a factor in a breakdown and as soon as THIS is unstigmatised, the better all round for mental health.

Alcohol psychosis however has direct links with no differing variables. Look up Korsakoff's Syndrome and study up a little, to suggest alcohol doesn't effect mental health is a crass and demeaning statement to those who have suffered. By figures alone, alcohol psychosis is a far bigger risk to society by a long way.

The figures speak for themselves, out of 6.2 million users of cannabis, 800 people are at risk from mental complications. Is this democracy when 6.2 million are stigmatised for 800 cases of abuse that are readily reported in the press with glee? By all means, educate, and prevent, but don't whip up frenzy, what possible objective use is there to this ethos?

The only way you are to lower the already small risk of cannabis related health issues is to take it out of kids hands who are damaging the plight of millions of users in the UK. Of course there is risk, but it is a humanistic risk of abuse, not the plant's chemistry. Cannabis is a crop, very similar to tomatoes in its botanic ways. If you harvest for size and weight and not for quality and cycle, you end up with a bitter, unripe fruit, cannabis is not void from this pretence. Harvest early when not ready, and you end up with a more unpredictable psychoactive element that will effect the vulnerable. Not to mention chemicals, contaminates and other harder substances that lace street cannabis; this is what most children smoke with the vast availability of it. Let the people who know how to harvest and farm this product take control and not street dealers who just look for a hefty weight. Cannabis is a tried and tested product that has been around for 4000 years in medicine and society, it has been criminalised for 80 years in the West, to suggest we don't know enough about this plant is western arrogance personified and frankly embarrassing to international relations.

All the while this substance is illegal, you hand the control over to gangs and dealers who only care about money, there is no quality control, there is no age restriction, all that matters is the all mighty dollar. So when criticism is given to the fact kids have abused and come off worse and are left scarred- in any logical environment- is it any wonder?! Keep it illegal and you hand children's safety to mob rule in every sense of the term.

Stop children smoking cannabis, we all agree on this point, it is not good for ANY community! The only way to do this is regulation, it is basic logic.

mwe152: "No-one devlops psychosis because they have a pint of beer or glass of wine every day!".

Actually, 126,000 developed mental health problems caused by alcohol in 2004-05.

"In-patient care for people who have mental health or behavioural disorders resulting from alcohol misuse, has also increased significantly, rising to 126,300 admissions in 2004-05, from 72,500 in 1995-96 (75 per cent over the ten years)."

http://www.ias.org.uk/[…]/al200602_p3.html

The journal Schizophrenia Research published a review last September entitled “Assessing the impact of cannabis use on trends in diagnosed schizophrenia in the United Kingdom from 1996 to 2005.”

It was expected, if cannabis use causes psychoses, that due to an increase in use preceding the dates examined, the rate of psychoses would increase.

The prediction of increase in psychoses is here (Addiction, April 2007):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17362293

It makes sense that if cannabis causes psychoses, the rate would fluctuate according to the use of it.

They found no such thing, the rate remained constant. The cohort was 600,000 UK patients per year.

The only conclusion is that cannabis use does not increase the rate of psychoses.

Here’s the abstract from PubMed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900

A recent systematic review concluded that cannabis use increases risk of psychotic outcomes independently of confounding and transient intoxication effects. Furthermore, a model of the association between cannabis use and schizophrenia indicated that the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia would increase from 1990 onwards. The model is based on three factors: a) increased relative risk of psychotic outcomes for frequent cannabis users compared to those who have never used cannabis between 1.8 and 3.1, b) a substantial rise in UK cannabis use from the mid-1970s and c) elevated risk of 20 years from first use of cannabis. This paper investigates whether this has occurred in the UK by examining trends in the annual prevalence and incidence of schizophrenia and psychoses, as measured by diagnosed cases from 1996 to 2005. Retrospective analysis of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) was conducted for 183 practices in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The study cohort comprised almost 600,000 patients each year, representing approximately 2.3% of the UK population aged 16 to 44. Between 1996 and 2005 the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia and psychoses were either stable or declining. Explanations other than a genuine stability or decline were considered, but appeared less plausible. In conclusion, this study did not find any evidence of increasing schizophrenia or psychoses in the general population from 1996 to 2005.

The journal Schizophrenia Research published a review last September entitled “Assessing the impact of cannabis use on trends in diagnosed schizophrenia in the United Kingdom from 1996 to 2005.”

It was expected, if cannabis use causes psychoses, that due to an increase in use preceding the dates examined, the rate of psychoses would increase.

The prediction of increase in psychoses is here (Addiction, April 2007):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17362293

It makes sense that if cannabis causes psychoses, the rate would fluctuate according to the use of it.

They found no such thing, the rate remained constant. The cohort was 600,000 UK patients per year.

The only conclusion is that cannabis use does not increase the rate of psychoses.

Here’s the abstract from PubMed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900

A recent systematic review concluded that cannabis use increases risk of psychotic outcomes independently of confounding and transient intoxication effects. Furthermore, a model of the association between cannabis use and schizophrenia indicated that the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia would increase from 1990 onwards. The model is based on three factors: a) increased relative risk of psychotic outcomes for frequent cannabis users compared to those who have never used cannabis between 1.8 and 3.1, b) a substantial rise in UK cannabis use from the mid-1970s and c) elevated risk of 20 years from first use of cannabis. This paper investigates whether this has occurred in the UK by examining trends in the annual prevalence and incidence of schizophrenia and psychoses, as measured by diagnosed cases from 1996 to 2005. Retrospective analysis of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) was conducted for 183 practices in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The study cohort comprised almost 600,000 patients each year, representing approximately 2.3% of the UK population aged 16 to 44. Between 1996 and 2005 the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia and psychoses were either stable or declining. Explanations other than a genuine stability or decline were considered, but appeared less plausible. In conclusion, this study did not find any evidence of increasing schizophrenia or psychoses in the general population from 1996 to 2005.

I fully believe that cannabis should be legalised/decriminalised, regulated, taxed and an honest and clear educational campaign carried out to enlighten people about the many benefits this plant can bring. Do the majority of people even know of the endocannabinoid system within our own bodies and the essential work it does?
I also think it is highly hypocritical to allow a pharmaceutical company (GW Pharm) to grow cannabis and sell it for profit while criminalising and punishing other users even for simple possession.
Double standards.

(http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2010-06-15a.948.0) Baroness Meacher (Crossbench): "We in Britain spend £19 billion or so on the criminal justice system responding to drugs and drug-related crime, most of it a consequence of the criminalisation of drug use."

 Baroness Afshar (Crossbench): "I must admit that, although I do not drink, I certainly did smoke pot in the 1960s. It was great fun. I did not do anything to anybody when I was high; I danced a lot and listened to music. I lived to tell the tale, and I assure noble Lords that I am not a criminal. Criminalising drugs "otherises" a whole category of people, many of them young people with a bright future in front of them."

 Baroness Murphy (Crossbench): We can blame prohibition for much of the crime and violence around the illicit drug markets, for a large fraction of drug overdoses and drug-related illnesses and for corruption and the violation of civil liberties.

Legalise it tax it and educate. Its the correct way forward and help reduce the deficit. Lets take away the revenue source for so many criminals.

http://www.jackherer.com/chapters.html Read this !

cannabis has huge enviroment factors too !

I'd like the freedom to grow and cultivate cannabis for my own personal use.

Allow the scientists to tell us if it is harmful or not - oh, wait, they did, then fired him. This shows the extent to which 'they' do not have a clue what they are doing, nor what to believe.

Change needs to happen!

If cannabis is not legalised that tobacco and cigarettes should be made illegal as well - double standards in the twenty first century is unacceptable!

There should be an official review into a) what would be the benefits of decriminalising cannabis? (reduction in legal procedures, health benefits of those who need it, reduction in alcohol misuse which would led to less crime, stopping the criminal underworld making the cash profits) b) the down side (... if any) c) can it get us with the immediate British problem of the deficit? YES d) what will be the long term effects? A new generation that are more level headed when it comes to drugs, less prescription drugs prescribed by doctors, less criminal activity and the stoppage of cannabis being a 'pathway' drug, etc....

Anyone with common sense and intelligence knows that the only people benefitting from the prohibition of Cannabis are the commercial growers who end up funding many far more harmful activities with their profits. Legalise it and forget about it - give us the right to grow our own natural plants for the love of logic and common sense.

I have smoked and enjoyed eating cannabis for about ten years. It works for me and millions of others. I am an architect with my own practice and work built throughout europe. I am not what those opposed to this wonderful plant like to think. I never smoked it until I was 23. I am glad that I did though.

Here is a comment I have coppied from above for you to reflect on as its rather funny and shows how ignorant those people who are against and who are trying to comment here are:

Posted by steviedj July 01, 2010 at 07:49AM
Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical.

I do not think I need to say anything except that if these idiots keep posting here it just strengthens our argument. They have no currency in there words.

The follow extract is from the LibDems policy paper...thought people might be interested to see it, if you haven't already.

I think it's a pretty good policy, could be doing with being tweaked here and there but on the whole it's good.

Honesty, Realism, Responsibility

Proposals for the Reform of Drugs Law

3.1 Cannabis

3.1.1 We accept that cannabis, although carrying certain health risks from long term use, is almost certainly less injurious to health than tobacco or than alcohol (which is legally consumed by 40 million people in the UK ). Its use is extremely widespread (based on the evidence of the British Crime Survey 1998, approximately one and a half million young people aged 16-29 will have used it in the last month), and its use is a key part of certain minority cultures represented in the UK.
 

3.1.2 We therefore support reclassification of cannabis from B to C as recommended by Runciman and currently under investigation by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs at the request of the Home Secretary. We would also support the legalisation of cannabis derivatives for medical purposes, subject to appropriate pharmaceutical controls and the successful completion of current clinical trials.

 

3.1.3 We would...remove the threat of legal action from the large number of otherwise perfectly law abiding people who choose to use cannabis, and giving an opportunity to obtain cannabis without resorting to criminal suppliers. We considered the Drugscope analysis of introducing civil as opposed to criminal penalties for cannabis possession, but this seemed to unnecessarily complicate the position by introducing a new range of sanctions.

3.1.4 While retaining the criminal penalties on the statute book, we therefore propose to issue policy guidance that it is not in the public interest to prosecute individuals for possession of cannabis for their own use, cultivation of small numbers of cannabis plants for their own use, or social supply of cannabis. As defined in the Runciman report, social supply covers a member of a small social group who supplies another member or members of that group believing he was acting on behalf of the group, which shared a common intention to use the drug for personal consumption. It would not apply to use in, or supply to, any group including minors, and we would certainly expect supply to minors to be vigorously prosecuted. We would accompany this by implementing the Runciman recommendation to repeal sections 8 (c) and (d) of the MDA, so that it would no longer be an offence for the occupier or manager of premises to allow consumption (as opposed to supply) of cannabis on their premises.

3.1.5 There is a logical argument for legalisation of the supply chain for cannabis. But current international legal obligations make this impossible. We therefore propose that, unless and until there is international agreement to change the UN Conventions, we go no further.

3.1.6 These steps would bring many benefits, ending the huge waste of police and court time on cannabis possession charges, and lifting the threat of criminalisation from many otherwise law-abiding citizens. By permitting own use cultivation and social supply, they would allow cannabis users considerable scope to acquire cannabis without resorting to criminal pushers. This would in turn reduce the number of people who may become involved in harder drug use through contact with criminal pushers offering a range of drugs, and cut the profits of organised crime.

3.1.7 We have given consideration to extending the policy of non-prosecution to supply of cannabis through specially licensed cafes, along the lines they exist in the Netherlands. However, we have rejected this because we believe that commercial supply to customers on this basis would constitute a clear breach of the UN Conventions incompatible with our commitment to international legality. The wholesale supply to the cafes themselves would be an even more blatant Convention infringement. These cafes would also involve local authorities in regulating and licensing operations dependent on a relationship with organised crime for their continuation in business. We are also not convinced that the number of users dependent on criminal suppliers would be substantially reduced.

So long as people are made aware of the downsides, let them use cannabis in the same way as cigarettes are controlled. They say the NHS benefits from cigarette tax to pick up the pieces, in the same way cannabis tax can do this. Let us be more open about the pluses and negatives about the drug. And take it out of the hands of drug pushers hoping to wean users onto harder drugs. The use of cannabis is normally a phase to grow out of, and should not have the threat of a criminal record hanging over it.

I must say that it is great that we have all come out here to debate this. The law has to change now. And after reading through many comments here it seems that those who enjoy cannabis have a higher rate of literacy and grammer than those against it. It is also evident that those against are just angry and frustrated people who need to do some real work on themselves.

"However, we have rejected this because we believe that commercial supply to customers on this basis would constitute a clear breach of the UN Conventions incompatible with our commitment to international legality."

The U.N. SINGLE CONVENTION ON NARCOTIC DRUGS, 1961 (http://www.unodc.org/pdf/convention_1961_en.pdf) is what they are referring to. Since its introduction the production, supply and use of illicit drugs has only increased.
13 states in the U.S. have used the legal work around of 'medicinal' cannabis to bypass these conventions. So to has Canada. At least 16 other countries have decriminalised possession for personal use.
In California Proposition 19 has been proposed to allow the state to move towards outright legalisation.
Various countries complain about this document as it removes the individual countries right to determine the best policy on drug use for their own populations.
This document has failed spectacularly to stop the increase in any drug use and the supply of drugs.
The U.K. government should seek a total rethink on this outdated and failed convention at U.N. level.
To quote one of the most powerful people (if not the most powerful person) in the world:
"I inhaled, frequently. That was the point" (Barack Obama, 2006)
Please don't hide behind a badly thought out and outdated U.N. convention, even the Americans are making a mockery of this foolish document.

Why would we need to decriminalise it?! You just affect other people.

@architect

I really agree with you about this web site. I have no idea whether the government will have the guts to do something about this, but the fact that we are having an open and adult discussion of this topic and it is being read at the heart of government free from the distorting effect of the main stream media is truly revolutionary. Who would have thought three months ago that that would be the case??

I agree, decriminalise and regulate use - but as alraedy mentioned do any of us think this will happen??? Not in my lifetime, but it makes a change from the press peddling absolute rubbish about cannabis use

I agree with this.

THE POWERS THAT BE WANT TO DUMB DOWN THE POPULATION WITH ALCOHOL AND KEEP PEOPLE AWAY FROM MIND OPENING AND EXPANDING SUBSTANCES TO STOP THEM QUESTIONING PUBLIC TAXES BEING RAISED AND THEN SYPHONED OFF FOR FOR GRREEDY POLITICANS TO DECORATE THEIR ALREADY SUBSIDISED RESIDENCES AND ALL THE MANY MORE ABUSES OF RANK AND POWER.
GIVE ADULTS THE POWER TO RELAX IN A LESS HARMFULL WAY THAN HAVING TO RUN THE GAUNTLET OF DRUNKEN IMBECILLES EVERY WEEK-END WHEN HAVING TO STOP DRINKING AND SOCIALISING AT A SET TIME WHICH IS ALSO A REPRESSIVE LAW(LICENSING HOURS)
PLUS LEGAL HASHISH WOULD NOT BE MIXED WITH TOXIC ADDITIVES TO MAXIMISE DEALERS PROFITS JUST AS LEGAL ALCOHOL IS NOT AS HARMFULL AS MOONSHINE.

@shodney
Do you have to shout?

Every valid point has been raised (most likely several times) in the comments above, therefore, I have only this to say.

Prohibition fails. The War on Drugs can not be won. Legalise weed for a safer, happier, healthier and more prosperous Britain!

Even the UNODC admit prohibition has failed and drugs use/addiction should be a health issue not a criminal one.

http://www.idpc.net/[…]/unodc-from-coercion-to-cohesion-treatment

Prohibition does not control or regulate something. It gives it to organised crime & terrorists as a source of profit & power.

the government have recently announced huge cuts in benefits and even bigger increases in taxes all in order to pull themselves out of national debt. There's a few things I can see wrong with that (but the majority of them are not actually that appropriate to this comment)either way the emergency budget has completely over looked what could be one of their biggest, and most consistent forms of income. Legalising cannabis would undoubtedly give the government a large income. Surely the tax free income that is currently sitting in the pockets of the chain of dealers could be put to better use on things that are needed like the NHS.
The claims that cannabis causes mental illnesses is completely unfounded, even in cases of people taking certain groups of medications there still isn't anything substantial or conclusive that links cannabis and mental illness.
The country already has a structure in which the sale of cannabis could be adapted into in much the same way as the Amsterdam 'coffee shops.'

I came to this web site and posted, making a Civil Rights case for propagation. I still believe that to be a reasonable argument, but my ideas have really shifted through reading the postings on this site. I thought that decriminalization would be fine, but unlikely, whereas I now think that full legalization is essential. The prohibition is causing so much harm.

Cannabis itself has many benefits, and few if any draw backs to most users, but it’s prohibition is pouring millions of pounds into the hands of criminal gangs, funding gun and other crime. What 'penrhos' says in the comment above is so true, prohibition does not control cannabis at all. It is doing the exact opposite. We have no control over it in this society, it is everywhere. If you really want to control it, you would legalize it and regulate it. Even if you dislike cannabis, even if you think that it is morally wrong, even if you think that getting high is stupid, the only way society is going to get any control over its use is to legalize it and regulate it and take it out of the hands of criminals.

This needs to happen. Beyond my own personal right to cultivate and use a plant, beyond the arguments about the pros and cons of using cannabis itself, beyond the potential tax benefits, we need to take it out of the control of the black market. Prohibition will never do that, only legalization will. Please, legalize it!

I hope all these comments give Nick the amunition to push for the FREEDOM of cannabis users.

Our government needs to do this to prove how much it wants to change things

Utterly wrong.
If anything they should impose additional large fines on people convicted of this.

Full decriminalisation, certainly, but beware of imitating the Netherlands, where Balkenende's CDA conservatives have already stopped the "coffeeshops” from serving alcohol along with marijuana and hashish. It's a small step towards their long-term goal of shutting them down altogether.

Unfortunately, it's all academic as far as Britain is concerned, because the Tories won't make real freedoms like this available in a million years, whatever the Deputy PM and millions of our citizens might want.

What are you so scared of jburton and other anti's being proved wrong again ?? Prohibition is your way and has failed utterly .. The War on Drugs is your way and has failed utterly ...time for a change ... regulate control and tax ..time for Gov to grow up !!

i have said this before in an unrelated thread. should the government fail to acknowledge this idea (which is obviously supported more than prohibition) it means this site was not set up for any real purpose other than to cherry pick ideas it was going to use anyway. FREE THE WEED!!

@swarner

Part of me agrees with you, that it does seem unlikely that the government will run with this, but...

Three months ago, could any of us have thought that we would have a Deputy PM who's party manifesto has called for a change in the law, or that we would be having this discussion in front of them?

And this web-site has let the cat out of the bag. The arguments made here, in such intelligent and well thought out ways have made it very clear that this issue has to be addressed. If it isn't, from now on every time there is a news item about an elderly Grandmother suffering from MS being dragged to court for growing her own cannabis, we'll know. We will know that the politicians know that the force or argument has been won, but were gutless. We know that along with all the arguments about tax and law and order, that this is also a civil rights issue, and our case will get stronger and stronger.

All over Europe and North and South America these changes are happening, and it will happen here, it is just a case of when. If they really are committed to civil liberties and repealing intrusive laws it will happen soon. If not, we will know that they were lying, and we will return to our cynicism about politics, but at some point it will change.

In many ways legalisation is also a Tory idea. There are parts of the Tory party that are libertarian, and on the whole the idea of the Tory's is for trade. It would not be hard for them to put it in such terms, a revenue raising and cost cutting measure. And don't forget, if they wanted to do this, they do have the ear of the editors of some of the papers that would oppose this, it would not be hard for them to ask them to start running more positive cannabis stories now would it...

there are plenty of economic points that can be made as well as the counter points to harm to health.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/drug-law-re-assessment

Legalise, not decriminalise. There is only one way of democratically finding a solution to this issue and that is full legalisation. Aping Holland would be a step in the right direction but even Holland falls short of what should be done in a free, open and democratic society.

Oh, BTW, @ the poster StevieDJ (first reply): To try and balance the effect of legalising cannabis with that of the legalisation of pedophilia is quite frankly sick, twisted and utterly unacceptable. You are an idiot of the highest order.

Decriminalising is not enough. The full legalisation of cannabis is needed, creating a fully legal market.

legalise, regulate and tax just look at prohabition on alcohol in the 20s in america and you can see how much harm prohabition does, it just increases the risk and damage to user and sociaty but it is legal taxed and regulated so the harm is reduced and the drug is under controle if it was ilegal people would be going blind, 10year olds would drink gin made in nexdoors bathtub and die, people would sell paint stripper as a substitute for a fast buck and the mafia would get all the monay insted of the fat bag of tax we get from drinkers at the mo. just imagin how safe cannabis would be if it was legal and controled with age restrictions and education as to the possable negative consequences and the money raised in tax would be huge. i always see drinkers who know alcohol doesnt mix with there personality and drink any way as its the only recreational drug avalable legaly and they dont watn to brake the law, i find cannabis doesnt make people angry some times like alcohol does, so then people who find they get andgry or depressed when drinking could take cannabis insted, reducing the harm to sociaty from alcohol.

free the people free the weed

i have noticed that all the people that have posted negatively and think cannabis should be banned and fined hevily have not put any justification for it, they just say they think it should be ilegal or baned or made class A, but with no explination as to why! it seems to me they are just victims of the governments current propagander and out right lies about cannabis and its risks and if they actualy spoke to some useres and did some real research in to it they would realise they are just a parrot repeating the prescribed words of some opresive laws justificatin for existance buy some people who want to look tough on drugs!

To quote Howard Marks from a Radio 4 interview:
“It(cannabis) does seem to cause this sort of imbalance and irrationality but only among people that don’t use it.”

I was appalled by the sacking of Professor Nutt, just because his findings did not fit with Labour's policies. He was reporting fact, which is more than what most politicians do!

I find it quite irrational that drug companies have tried to produce a synthetic version of cannabis (Cesamet & Nabilone),which funnily enough doesn't give patients as much pain relief & anti emetic effect, when it exists in a natural form.
I am keen to understand whether the Liberal Democrats are as keen to legalise Cannabis, as they were prior to the General Election? ? ? ? ?

(I hope so.)

It is quite clear that 99% of the posts here support the de-criminalization of cannabis.

Government - Please don't be scared to debate this. A few right wing idiots will slate you, but the public will vote for you, and thats surely what matters more, right? Please don't worry about PR in the short term, just decriminalize it and your popularity will take a positive turn.

We need you to listen to us for once, please. The hope is always there, but we are almost always let down.

what a stupid idea. many people/patients who smoke this garbage destroy their minds with it, especially with skunk.

all drugs must be licensed, medically speaking, and administered by medical professionals.

decriminalisation will lead to more crime and less productivity.

biblewinsciencefail @ youtube

@ biblewinsciencefails

Do you agree that cannabis should be legal if prescribed by a doctor then?

@biblewinsciencefail
your name says it all. ignorant to science. There is a CASUAL link with cannabis and psychosis and is about the same as alcohol psychosis.
how will it add to more crime? i fail to see how taking out of the hands of criminals increases crime? Potheads arn't violent and very rarely commit crimes (if pot was the only factor)

@biblewinsciencefail

Provide genuine scientific evidence that "Skunk destroys minds" and maybe your argument would hold water.

As for licensing drugs - then I take it you would be happy if Alcohol, Fags & Coffee were all licensed and only available from merdical professionals.

Also how do you know that "decriminalisation will lead to more crime and less productivity".

If a commodity is prohibited then the government relinquish all control and gift it to the criminals which causes violence (look at alcohol prohibition in the US).

If Cannabis (or all drugs) were regulated and controlled by the government there would be no "Drug gangs", no "Drug barons" and no "Drug wars" as it would be normalised - there wouldn't be the demand for "Super Strong Skunk" as it is just a by-product of prohibition.

People attracted to taking Cannabis because of its risky illegal status wouldn't bother because it would be mainstream & not so attractive.

People who take it should not be criminalised but should be helped within the NHS framework (just as alcoholics & Smokers are).

I know people that use Cannabis and they are just as productive as anyone else (BTW : have you ever had a day off work because of a hangover?).

There will always be people that abuse alcohol, food or drugs & end up with health issues, but the vast majority can use alcohol, food or drugs with no ill effects whatsoever - it boils down to personal responsibility.

So why should the majority of sensible users suffer because of predjudice and failing system.

And looking at your Sig - Cannabis is a plant created by GOD and placed on this earth for humans to use, so by banning it you are banning one of GOD's creations.

Reply to Jonathan July 01: "Cannabis users should be questioning themselves, not the government. Why are you using your money to sponsor criminality?"

Because I do not sponsor criminals, the answer is simple: Grow your own, ditch the dealer!

Why should abstainers and vulnerable people suffer from being exposed to drugs on the streets against their will because some people want to get high?
Cannabis is not more popular because of its illegal status. Do millions go out and get drunk, or smoke their health away, because its breaking the rules? No. Legalisation would make cannabis use more widespread because it would be more socially acceptable and easily obtainable. People would assume it was harmless, even more so than they do now, and take it without knowing the facts.
Government, do not allow mob rule to sway you on an issue that is about morality and public health. The law abiding people of this country will not allow a harmful substance to be inflicted on society just so you can win a few votes.

The full effects of cannabis, especially the high-strength stuff, have not been conclusively established and experts vary wildly in their judgements. However their IS evidence of it causing long-term personality changes, brain damage, antisocial behaviour disorder, schizophrenia and depression. This is especially true of high THC varieties, such as Skunk. Passive exposure is likely unless the drug is low strength and being smoked in a confined space. Do you people really think smoking this stuff is a victimless crime? It isn't. If you smoke it in public or by an open window you ARE hurting people. This is a legal issue, it has nothing to do with civil liberties.

@jat24

People shouldn't be exposed to drugs on the street. They are at the moment, because there is no control, so drug dealers deal on the streets. If it were sold in licensed and controlled premises, and controls were in place about use in city centres in the same way that we do for alcohol we would probably take most of the cannabis users off the street.

Your statement about drug use being not more popular because it is illegal is not born out by the countries that have change from prohibition.

It seems that your main argument against legalisation is that it is not moral. In our liberal democracy we don't legislate according to morality. Morality is an opinion. What is moral for you is not moral for me. So, the moral argument is not justified.

If prohibition was ended, users could get proper information on cannabis, rather than the nonsense that is put out in the media about it, and thus make their own informed, adult choice.

If you are worried about the 'high-strength' street stuff, then legalisation and regulation would answer your concerns. It would allow any strains that are found to be particularly strong not to be licensed, and other strains to be made available. Most users would choose legal strains over any illegal ones that were still in circulation.

I don't think you have any references to back up your claims about the negative effects of cannabis, but there are links that people have put up on this site that show that there is evidence that cannabis is in fact useful in cases of depression. This is why in the States, many states are now bringing in medical marijuana laws.

The passive smoking issue is much the same as that of smoking. There are many other ways to take cannabis - vaporising and eating it. If smoking in public is a problem...1) it already is now under prohibition 2) it is possible to ban it in public places.

You are wrong, this is a civil rights issue - If I grow it, and ingest it in my own home then it is no business of the state. Would you agree that I should be allowed to do that, if I am not smoking it, or doing it in public?

 

Jay24 - I suggest you read the contents of some of the links posted in this thread instead of reading the "Daily Fail" for your facts.

This is a civil liberties issue, As a tax paying, law abiding member of society I should not be persicuted for my choice of relaxation. Nobody is forcing drugs on anyone (Although pushers will in the current situation).

There are health warnings on Fags there are countless alcohol awareness advertisments - If Cannabis were available legally I would expect there to be health warnings supplied with it.

Scientific evidence from countries where it has been legalised have all seen a decrease in consumption and a decrease in Drug related crime.

And you are missing the point of this thread, if you check under "laws" there are a couple of threads regarding legalisation of all drugs, not just Cannabis. Decriminalisation is not the same as legalisation.

There is plenty of good scientific evidence about the effects of Cannabis and it is well known that it is no more likely to cause psycological issues than alcohol abuse (both come in at about 3%). There is no scientific evidence that Cannabis causes brain damage, although there is a consensus that it should not be abused by people during the formative years. This is why its is important to regulate it under goverment control. A criminal is not going to do an age check on someone buying drugs a licensed shop would have to.

The strengh issue - I agree Skunk does seem to be an issue but this is due to prohibition, just like moonshine was a by-product of alcohol prohibition. Most Cannabis users I know would much rather have a nice tasty mellow smoke than some rough, monging crap from the dealer - but when there is no legal alternative you take what's on offer.

What you should realy be on your high-horse about is the contaminents that these criminals put onto street-weed to bulk it up and add weight (Ground glass, sand, hairspray, oil the list is endless) and the possible health-effects this could lead to down the line.

Also you are hardly going to be exposed to Cannabis smoke while you're down the pub as there is a smoking ban in the UK and Smoke is Smoke.

Most people would be happy to sit at home knowing that they can smoke what they like without risking 14 years inside. Which is more than you would get for paedophilia - which would make steviedj happy (see first post in thread).

The Netherlands is a basket case with legalised euthanasia of old people pressurised into signing their own death warrants and widespread paedaphelia as well as legalised cannabis.

The long term effects of cannabis smoking on later schizophrenia are well documented - and the drug is now even stronger and more harmful than it was in the past. Postings here are the self-servings of drug addicts.

if you don't legalise it now i call for a revote

@Webranger

Oh dear, first off cannabis is NOT legal in the Netherlands it is tolerated in the coffee shops but not on the streets and it is still illegal. NO country has legalised it yet because of the sanctions they would face from the UN if they tried to.

Second, cannabis does NOT cause schizophrenia, there is NO causal link, study after study has shown this all over the world. If you want sources I can give you those.

Cannabis is NO stronger than what it was in the 60's, 70's etc. Mankind is not yet clever (if ever) enough to improve on God's plant.

The resin or hash that was sold in the 60's right up to the early 90's was around 80 to 90% thc as resin is traditionally wholly thc crystals. In the early 90's (incidentally around the time Michael Howard was Home Secretary) 'soapbar' arrived in the UK. This is cannabis resin cut with boot polish, rat poison, coffee and whole host of nasties, this took the thc content down to as little as 1 to 3%.

Nowadays the dealers do not flush their plants before harvest to rid the plant of fertilizers and the like. They will harvest the plant earlier than in the past, meaning the thc crystals have not had time to convert into sugars - giving a high that can cause anxiety and paranoia. Add to that the bud has not been dried (so it is heavier, more profit) or cured and the high may not be a pleasant experience.

This is an effect of prohibition. Dealers don't care what quality they punt out as long as they make their money, and the more of that they can make the better.
 
The faster the turnover the more profit and seeing as it takes 2 weeks to dry it properly and a good few weeks to cure it to get to a mellow relaxing high you can see why they rush the product onto the streets.

In the past the cannabis was imported from countries like Afghanistan, India etc. The time it took for the product to travel to the UK was enough to dry it out and cure it substantially. Now with the advent of indoor grows it can be grown in the country of use and doesn't have to be imported.

Thirdly, cannabis is not addictive and if you had taken the time to read all of the posts here you will see that the vast majority are level headed intelligent people who are not only interested in their own hides but the hides of our whole society. Plus if you read the other posts you may learn something about cannabis you didn't know.

One more thing....skunk, is a strain of cannabis that was developed in 1978 in the US, it was taken to the Netherlands and crossed with other strains to develop a lot of the strains we have today. Skunk#1 as it was known has all but disappeared now.

The media and government have spread the lie that it is a different type of stronger cannabis, it isn't. If you want to call the cannabis that is obtained by dealers anything then call it 'dealer weed' please, it's closer to the truth.

@jay24 You ask:
"Why should abstainers and vulnerable people suffer from being exposed to drugs on the streets against their will because some people want to get high?"

As a disabled man of 20 years who has been housebound for most of that time, and speaking as someone who simply cannot take any substance, whether it is your legal killers or the ones prescribed to me, it is a direct insult to suggest that cannabis should remain illegal due to the fact you do not want to see it.

Imagine my position for just one minute: you are in dire pain, you have studied a plant for many years and have read everything you can on the subject and it has been proven beyond any doubt by all known science and medicine to be quite harmless if respected and treated right. I take it to sleep, I take it so I can watch a film without the need to shift every minute because limbs are screaming in pain. I am have never been to the cinema due to this very reasoning, if cannabis was legal, I could go to the pictures! I guess I am a demon to society.

And then we have alcohol, the legal drug. Town centres are a no go each night due to drunk behaviour and in many cases, a police barrier has to utilised to keep the pub goers away from "normal" folk. It is killing 10 000 a year, and is accounts for 40% of all A and E cases, and the crime rate through vandalism, fighting, abuse, domestic abuse, costs the police is vast and costs the NHS are £3 billion each year. It kills one youngster per day due to poisoning alone and you are statistically at greater risk of mental health problems with drink.

The hypocrisy of current law is torturous to say the least.

"...and how can something with no recorded fatalities be illegal"

How many people die each year from aspirin?
How many people die each year from Alcohol
How many people die each year from Tobacco
How many people die each year from Prescribed medicines
How many people die each year from Coffee (!)
etc etc etc etc ALL legal "drugs"

How many people die each year from Cannabis use? ZERO

Come on Government do the right thing and get some REAL control over drugs, prohibition controls nothing. Have the Gusto to REALLY change things for the good.

I agree with Lord Denning's arguments in his documentary a few years ago that the "war on drugs" was lost and that anyone who wants to take any drug will do so anyway. He argued for complete legalisation. Failing that, we should adopt the Portugese model - just look at the results since it was introduced in 2001.

Davina.

Although I agree with the sentiment of this idea, in practice copying The Netherlands is not a good model. In the Netherlands Cannabis is illegal. Selling it is illegal, coffee shops are illegal, growing it is illegal. This creates all sorts of problems. Taxing cannabis is very difficult, coffee shops cant declare their sales because what they are doing is illegal, also the supply of cannabis is basically via a black market. Lets go the whole hog and just LEGALISE it.

To summarize my comments on another similar post:

1. Cannabis is physically less harmful than other (legal and illegal) drugs
2. Cannabis is not a gateway drug, any more than alcohol
3. Cannabis is not physically addictive
4. Cannabis does, however affect young people by changing their brain. So does alcohol and tobacco.
5. Cannabis makes up the majority of illegal drug intake and possession
6. Cannabis should be legalized to keep it out of the hands of drug dealers, taxed to ensure more revenue for the government and medicalized to remove the drug culture glorification and help treat people with real problems.

Agree with the majority of comments on here. Tax revenue should go to drug education programs (if you know the harms, you're less likely to do it).

We need to respect evidence-based policy and science -- listen to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs and not sack them for political purposes when you don't agree with them.

Better still - a referendum on cannabis legalisation?

i agree the dutch model stops crime makes the state money and they seem pretty happy

i fully support the legalisation of cannabis , and fully agree with the points made above but we also have to take into account the millions of pounds that leave this country every year in the form of tourism to amsterdam for the soul purpose of smoking cannabis in a legal form . the sheer amount of revinue that could be generated by cannabis should not be ignored any longer.

Either decriminalize it or criminalize tobacco and alcohol.
One rule for all.

Stop the hypocrisy!
 

THERE ARE NO RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH CANNABIS USE. LOOK AT THE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND NOT THE PROPOGANDA
WEED HELPS PEOPLE BE HAPPY AND RELAXED, THIS ISNT A WAR ON DRUGS, THIS IS A WAR ON PLEASURE!!!!!!

1. Cannabis is physically less harmful than other (legal and illegal) drugs
2. Cannabis is not a gateway drug, any more than alcohol
3. Cannabis is not physically addictive
4. Cannabis does, however affect young people by changing their brain. So does alcohol and tobacco.
5. Cannabis makes up the majority of illegal drug intake and possession
6. Cannabis should be legalized to keep it out of the hands of drug dealers, taxed to ensure more revenue for the government and medicalized to remove the drug culture glorification and help treat people with real problems.

There is no good argument in keeping it illegal.

If you want usage to go down, legalise it.

(based on usage patterns in Holland, Portugal, and the dip in use caused by the reducing it to a class C drug)

If you don't want billions of pounds per year flowing to criminal networks, legalise it.

(based on the amount of regular users in the UK)

If you want hospitals and schools to be saved from the mighty ConDem cutshammer, legalise it.

(based on the savings from the policing of Cannabis users, and massive revenues that it's taxation)

If you want the police to catch more murderers, rapists, and crack dealers, legalise it.

(based on the freeing up of police resources if they didn't have to deal with cannabis users)

Let the stoners help reduce Britain's debt, just so long as we are saved from the tedious psuedo-philosophy that flows from some stoners!

Decrimilisation would lead to an undesireable fudge. Full legalisation would allow regulation and taxation.

I agree with the calls for full legalisation. Full legalisation, regulation and control of all currently 'controlled' (i.e. not controlled) drugs.
As I have posted on other proposals:This issue is the single most important issue in society currently. It simply cannot and should not be ignored. It is nearly 40 years since this law was introduced; in which time debate about ALL drug use has been stifled, lives have been ruined, families torn apart and misinformation perpetuated.
Think of a world without prohibition; one where gang-related violence is curtailed to an extraordinary extent, where street prostitution no longer exists, where prisons are no longer full to bursting with non-violent criminals whose only crime is to fund their own (and others) addictions. These people need help, we need help from our government. Where individuals can make free, informed choices about their behaviour based upon science and evidence, and a sense of personal responsibility. Where respect for the law is fully restored. Where police time is spent chasing violent crime and disorder. Where resources are directed to education and treatment, not punishment. Where usage of 'illegal' drugs is no longer 'cool'. Where alcohol is rightfully put in it's place as a drug far more powerful, damaging and adddictive than we wish to admit.
The repeal of prohibition is no panacea for creating a society with a sense of true personal responsibility, but it would certainly be one of the biggest steps made in generations. It would not remove the damage that drugs cause, but it would remove all the damage that prohibition causes, and we all know these.

Governments have repeatedly ignored this issue, lacking the courage or will to see the facts before them.
Clegg and Cameron both have expressed support for a more rational, science-based approach to drug policy and now is the time to show true courage to end this disgraceful situation, one which we as a society sit back and tacitly accept.
As invited, I am being demanding about my rights. This is the elephant in the room. I DEMAND that we should not compromise, we should not shy away from the truth, we should not compromise our liberty and we should not continue to wage a hateful war on our own people, and the crime of being human.

legalise the growing of cannabis for personal use by people with disabilities, eg, MS, Arthritis, Asthma, who it has been proven to help.. it is far less medically harmfull than long tern steroids and niasds use, and far less damaging than valium given to arthritis sufferers, valium is 20 times more addictive than cannabis in its pure form as a hemp .. and hemp has omega 3 and 6 properties as a herbal suppliment, oil and tea which helps colestoral.

There's a benefit that often gets ignored in this debate. If we followed the same path as USA providing cannabis for their medical marijuana shops, it provides income to people working at home.

Simply, the various plants are home grown, then sold to the shops directly.

Stay-at-home parents could easily grow 12 plants in a standard greenhouse, on 8-12 week cycles, making enough money to come off benefits and effectively becoming self-employed.

The current tax system allows a great deal of breaks for those setting up businesses, so the cost of the greenhouse, pots, compost, any lighting, watering or heating equipment bought etc are all deductible against tax in the first year, so set up costs are minimal.

The argument for me is an economic one. People off benefits, it's an "easy" job (in that the plants require very little care) for those who are afraid of a bit of hard graft, it's easy to make sufficient money to come off benefits, start paying taxes and improve the quality of care given to their children.

The ONLY argument against is social, and frankly that's not government's place to legislate.

All arguements to keep it illegal have fallen. There are calls from the scientist, the doctors and even the economists to legalise cannabis.

The government has no right to dictate just to please the ignorant fear-feeding masses.

As i said somewhere else its a plant part of nature it grows from the ground..Why is the goverment banning Nature? its just plain silly really.

The Government is to serve us not the other way round if we the people of England and the UK want something changed then it should be changed, damn if we had to vote on it i would personally go around the streets talking to people about it finding out what the general public really thinks about Cannabis and show them true facts.

"Oh its not good for you it makes you dumb"...Oh really? i know someone whos been smoking for 18 years now and has A-levels and University grades and now lives in canada earning god knows how much! so yeah hes dumb..

Infact im not affraid to speak my mind personally i think the Prime Minister should smoke a joint, Dont knock it till you have tried it people.

Also just to add i think this is great that our Goverment has acually asked us what we want changing properly so you got some respect there.

@Ashaw - you are missing something.....

A lot of MP's have used Cannabis, other drugs, prostitutes & fiddled their expenses - but they get away with it, they don't get criminalised....

MP's are seen to be above the law.....

Even the Sunday morning religion program on the BBC discussed Cannabis & prohibition and came to the conclusion that current laws were wrong.

The Possession laws should be scrapped.

The key is people that choose to use drugs should not be criminalised for using drugs, people should only be criminalised for criminal activities like trafficing/selling drugs or commiting actual crimes like theft, violence.

There is an easy way to test the water with legalisation/Decriminalisation without incurring the wrath of the Daily Fail & other tabloids.

Legalise cannabis for medical reasons, you get a prescription from your doctor, apply for a licence to grow a limited number of plants at home from the government (like big businesses can), pay an administration fee to cover the cost and get issued a "Medical Cannabis growers/users licence".

You then notify your local Police and they visit you to ensure you are sticking to the license and you are growing safely & securely (we don't want sick people being beaten up by criminals for their medical cannabis).

While this scheme was running the government could investigate the results and if positive create a plan for full legalisation/decriminalisation using results of the "medical trial".

This is proven scheme in the US, which has the most draconian drugs laws in the free world & does not go against any UN or EU resolutions over drugs.

The war on drugs has failed and cost millions
free the weed!!!

So many good points here(and a few ridiculous ones about paedophiles)and I could post a whole variety of reasons why this needs to be pushed into action but most of it has been said.
We need to stop scaremongering, get rid of all these archaic ideas about cannabis use and be honest with people. Too much of ANYTHING is bad for you but stop wearing blinkers to the obvious (insert facts/figures/research/articles about how no-one has ever died from smoking pot & how many people die from alcohol abuse etc) then it becomes clear that if you EDUCATE and INFORM then there does not have to be concerns over misuse or dependency on cannabis any more than there does over anything else that is bad for you in excess that is LEGAL.
 Take a lead from The Netherlands, stop wasting money and time on pot smokers who cause no trouble and just want to be free to express themselves and medical users who can testify to the benefits.
 This change can bring positive changes for lots of people, bring in some money for the UK, tax the stuff, stop the spread of misinformation and old fallacies.
 Be brave and try it.

The Netherlands model works perfectly and I can't remember hearing any horror stories about cannabis either here or in NL; actually… there was one: the sacking of Professor Nutt. Much-needed revenue could easily be raised from taxation.

The number of brazen 'pot heads' amazes me - you should be ashamed.

Decriminalization will result in only one thing - the freedom of criminals to operate. As in the Netherlands, casting a blind eye has simply allowed the problem to worsen. It dosen't make people safe, it corrupts morals.

@asdasd
Well legalise it then to ensure the complete removal of the criminal element. Doing background checks to anyone starting up a coffeeshop would be a good way to stop a criminal element and to have licensed supplier (small growing companies that have to be proven to be crime free and legit).
"it corrupts morals" its not the governements job to enforce morality. If you don't want to smoke pot then don't but 2,000,000 a month light up in this country and they have a right to do so.

@asdasd

The law should not be abused for the benifit of someones moral beliefs.

If Mary whitehouse was able to create laws we would all be watching very bland TV due to her moral standpoint. If laws were made to appease the morals of some religions then alcohol would be illegal.

Laws should be made to protect the weak, fight crime & promote equality.

I'm sure most Dutch Coffeeshop owners would be horrified to hear you class them as criminals when they are running legitimate businesses and paying taxes (I know the trafficing part is still illegal but it doesn't cause the levels of crime we get here).

In some ways you are correct Decriminilisation doesn't remove the criminal element from the supply chain but it stops users and people who want to grow it themselves being criminialised, jailed with hardened criminals & having any hope of employment destroyed. This breaks so many human rights it isn't funny.

In truth the best option is full legalisation with government regulation so only legitimate licensed businesses can sell cannabis, supplied from a licensed source to people aged 18 or over - that they can smoke at home or stood with the social outcasts (tobacco smokers). It should be illegal to smoke it in the street and so should smoking tobacco.

I am not a "pot-head" but I do believe in peoples freedom to choose their poison.

If I want to responsibily take cannabis I should be allowed to without having to deal with criminals or risk prosicution.

If I want to responsibily take harder-drugs I should be allowed to without having to deal with criminals or risk prosicution.

If I want to have a pint down the pub I should be allowed to without having to deal "piss-heads" wanting to cause a fight.

It is not like Cannabis users are a small minority - there are Millions of them that regularly break a law that has no scientific basis and no credibility.

Nice idea!

I agree with Mike Oldroyd who posted this idea.

This would be a net benefit for the country. Be bold, be brave and make a change we can be proud of.

Time to change this outdated law.

asdasd wrote:
"Decriminalization will result in only one thing - the freedom of criminals to operate. As in the Netherlands, casting a blind eye has simply allowed the problem to worsen. It dosen't make people safe, it corrupts morals."

--------------

Prohibition HAS resulted in criminals having the freedom to operate with impunity and they are making billions. The 'problem' as you call it in the Netherlands has not worsened at all, they have one of the lowest consumptions of cannabis in Europe...whereas we have one of the highest.

At the moment children of any age can obtain any amount of cannabis they want, all they need is the money to pay for it. If the sale of cannabis was regulated to certain licensed shops it would be more difficult for them to buy. There would always be the few who would be able to obtain it, but the numbers would be hugely reduced from what they are now, as is shown by Portugal.

As for your comment that it corrupts morals I have two things to say.

The first is that it isn't the governments job to legislate morality and second the laws governing cannabis are flouted so much because it is regarded by many to be a 'bad law'. The substance in question is not as harmful as the government, and government led research, would have you believe. Being lied to and then prosecuted for using a substance that causes no harm to millions is the thing that corrupts morals because it causes a lack of respect for government and law.

I have a brother who is a respected psychologist with over 25 years practice here and in America. In all his 25 years of practice he swore he never had one case of cannabis causing schitzophrenia. In fact he told me off the record that in 99 percent of cases it was abusive parents, lack of love, too much television and also there diet. Those that had used cannabis were actually helped by the herb as it put there condition into the background and made them able to function due to the balance of CBD to THC.
The hysteria we often hear about mental illness is because the government and related bodies pay and bribe a select few of heqalth professional to say what they want them to say. These are usually the shitty ones who just do there job for the money.

May I add that many of the patients he saw were chronic boozers and fag smokers.

I have smoked cannabis for ten years with no issues, running my own architectural practice.

PROHABITION IS MURDER, LEGALIZE CANNABUIS FOLLOWED BY ALL DRUGS.

SUPPORT PROHABITION YOU SUPPORT GANGS, GUNS AND DEATH.

PROHABITION IS STUPID.

As somebody who suffers from chronic pain, I find it ridiculous that my doctors can prescribe me large amounts of opiates (which are potentially dangerous, addictive, and leave me so fuzzy-headed that I can hardly function), yet cannabis (much safer, non-addictive, and a drug on which I can still think clearly enough to work) is unavailable. Yes, cannabis may be ill-advised for certain people with family histories of schizophrenia, but doctors can advise on that the same way that they advise people with heart conditions not to eat fatty food, etc. The use of cannabis has been a political football for far too long. It's time for grown-up, evidence-based policy making.

>The key is people that choose to use drugs should not be criminalised
>for using drugs, people should only be criminalised for criminal
>activities like trafficing/selling drugs

I find this idea rather bizarre. First off there seems to me something fundamentally daft about making one side of a voluntary transaction legal and the other side illegal. It's about like making it illegal to take a bribe, but legal to offer one.

But more practically one of the chief harms of the WOD is pouring money into the coffers of organised crime.

There must be a legal and properly regulated source of supply and that source must not be unduly expensive (otherwise people will still go to the criminals).

Once you have that the drug pushers are out of business anyway.

Decriminalisation cannot achieve this.
 

Legalise it tax it heavily and lets see how many brain dead people are walking about then with paranoid delusions people should be able to choose if they want to take drugs also if people want to kill themselves with drugs let them do it there are too many people in the UK anyways from a
NON Smoker
NON Drinker
NON DRUG Taker.

Let the Action Commence.

As others have said, quite obviously the only rational policy is to legalise, regulate and tax cannabis use. The same arguments apply to all other currently illegal drugs, although the appropriate degree of regulation may differ. The harm caused by the current failed drugs policy far outweighs the harm that would result from legalising them.

The facts supporting these conclusions and much other relevant information, analysis and policy proposals are conveniently available on the Transform drug policy foundation website (www.tdpf.org.uk).

Smoking tobacco and heavy alcohol drinking are not illegal, but probably cause considerably more harm than the use of cannabis and other banned drugs. Making it illegal for adults to take such drugs is therefore illogical. It also seriously infringes their civil liberties, which is another reason for legalising cannabis (and other illegal drugs).

From a liberty-loving non-drug taker.

Why would cannabis users be brain dead? Do you see any brain dead posts here (prohibition advocates excepted)?

Cannabis doesn't kill.....hang on do these people even read the other posts on this thread or do they just look at the proposal and scroll straight to the bottom to insult and ridicule?

I only ask because it seems the same mindless Daily Mail/Sun (delete as appropriate) dross is being spouted by each and every one of them.

Drink kills thousands every year, and makes lots very sick. Legal
Smoking kills thousands every year, and makes lots very sick. Legal

Cannabis does not kill anyone. Illegal

Are we ever going to get reasonable laws. You want people to respect them but look at them.

I HOPE MR CLEGG THAT U CAN SEE THAT TODAY BRITISH PEOPLE OF THE UNITED KINGDOM ALL AGREE THAT CANNABIS SHOULD BE LEGALIZED.I HOPE YOU WILL NOT IGNORE ALL THE COMMENTS I HOPE YOU WILL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

To all those who believe that cannabis doesn't do any harm, I would suggest that you read the latest info. from the Royal College of Psychiatrists at http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/[…]/cannabis.aspx

There IS a strong link between use of cannabis and serious mental illness. Added to that, having a load more drivers on our roads high on dope isn't going to reduce the number of accidents.

1) "A declining incidence of treated cases of schizophrenia over the period when cannabis use has increased suggests, however, that cannabis use is unlikely to have caused cases of schizophrenia that would not otherwise have occurred."
"Adverse effects of cannabis"
Wayne Hall, Nadia Solowij THE LANCET Vol 352 November 14, 1998
Note how the Royal college of Psychiatrists use the term 'mental illness' and then refer to research into cannabis psychosis. Keep in mind that cannabis psychosis is a rare and short lived condition similar to alcohol psychosis.

2)"The effects of cannabis on laboratory based tasks show clear impairment with respect to tracking ability, attention and other tasks depending on the dose administered. These effects however, are not as pronounced on tasks of greater ecological validity i.e. real driving or simulator tasks. Indeed, compensatory effort can be invoked to offset impairment in the driving task."
http://webarchive.nationala[…]rivingareviewoft4764?page=1

DUI is against the law for both alcohol and illict (and some licit) drugs and no stoner wants to kill or be killed by DUI.

@gxlewis

Driving whilst high would be an offence. I don't understand why people suppose that when cannabis is legal, suddenly every single person is high 24 hours a day?!? Is everyone drunk 24 hours a day? Drinking is legal and drinking and driving is legal.

You join the dots.

If your read the research into alcohol the same patterns emerge in its users; increased chance of depression and psychosis. To look at the effects of cannabis without putting it into context by examination of the psychological effects of alcohol helps create ignorance about both drugs.
I hope all those who believe cannabis should remain illegal apply the same wisdom to alcohol, otherwise they are guilty of serious hypocrisy.

Posted by gxlewis July 09, 2010 at 09:04AM

To all those who believe that cannabis doesn't do any harm, I would suggest that you read the latest info. from the Royal College of Psychiatrists at http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/[…]/cannabis.aspx

We all know there are some Harms associated with a minority of cannabis users. To say we will all suffer these issues is as good as saying all drinkers are alcoholics.

If you would take as much time to inform yourself of the overall facts including the issues regarding Alcohol or Tobacco you will see Cannabis is less damaging to society or the individual when you remove the prohibition issues and regulate it properly. The regulatory system is already present in the UK with regards to Alcohol and would need little if any modification with regards to Cannabis and some other recreational drugs.

Indeed if the Gov followed its own legislation to the letter Alcohol would likely be prohibited, the Gov have also acknowledged in their own publications that the very laws that cover cannabis have no scientific or rational methodology. If this, in itself wasn't enough they have previously refused to allow any proper scrutiny or coherent dialogue of the reasons behind their thinking and even go as far as sacking their own UNPAID and highly qualified independant advisors.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/[…]/

I'm sure all who have concerns will benefit from the reasonings expressed by Proff Nutt in the above interview, PLEASE take the time to PROPERLY INFORM yourself on this issue.

Cannabis and other drugs must be controlled and no longer allowed to be the mulit-billion pound/dollar cash cow that supports criminal organisations Globally which is just one major failing of their prohibition.

Again I will Quote Lord Denning: "If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both."

Anyone believing that cannabis legalisation will cause the collapse of society has only to look at the countries where it has been legalised/decriminalised to see they have lower drug crime and usage rates than we do.

Legalising cannabis will not turn the whole country into stoners overnight - people that do not take cannabis now will probably not take cannabis then.

The law & H&S regulations already cover drink/drugs and driving/operating machinery and do not need changing for legalisation of cannabis.

The smoking laws would need tweeking so it covered Tobacco & cannabis and I would expect it not to be allowed to be smoked in the street but these are the finer points.

The key issue is that cannabis users are persicuted for a pastime that is scientifically proven to be less harmfull than consuming alcohol & that current legislation is not based on science but on media hype & political morals.

Cannabis can cause health issues but so can eating peanuts or gluten, only in a regulated market can users be educated and protected from harm effectively.

More people have been killed by electic gates than cannabis this year - do you suggest we lock up everyone caught with an electric gate for 14 years?

Posted by Pastorius

"Driving whilst high would be an offence. I don't understand why people suppose that when cannabis is legal, suddenly every single person is high 24 hours a day?!? Is everyone drunk 24 hours a day? Drinking is legal and drinking and driving is legal.

You join the dots."

Drinking and driving is legal? And you are telling me to join the dots?

It stands to reason that if you decriminalise cannabis, you're going to get a lot more people smoking dope and a lot more driving under the influence. More accidents, more death on the road - yeah great, just what the country needs.

Posted by MattForFreedom July 09, 2010 at 11:05AM
"1) "A declining incidence of treated cases of schizophrenia over the period when cannabis use has increased suggests, however, that cannabis use is unlikely to have caused cases of schizophrenia that would not otherwise have occurred."
"Adverse effects of cannabis"
Wayne Hall, Nadia Solowij THE LANCET Vol 352 November 14, 1998

A further and much later study, reported in The Lancet in July 2007, which analysed reports from 35 published studies, found ‘a consistent increase in incidence of psychosis outcomes in people who had used cannabis’. Their analysis suggested that there was a 40 per cent increase in risk of psychosis in study participants who had ever used cannabis. Effects were larger with frequent use, with an increased risk of up to 200 per cent in those who used cannabis most heavily.

Ref. 20] Moore, T.H.M, Zammit, S, Lingford-Hughes, A, Barnes, T.R.E, Jones, P.B, Burke, M. and Lewis, G, 2007, ‘Cannabis use and risk of psychotic or affective mental health outcomes: a systematic review’, The Lancet, vol 370, pp 319-328.

“Marijuana's effects on actual driving performance were assessed in a series of three studies wherein dose-effect relationships were measured in actual driving situations that progressively approached reality.

… THC's effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300 µg/kg never exceeded alcohol's at bacs of 0.08%; and, were in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs. Yet, THC's effects differ qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the formers users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence.”

REFERENCE: H. Robbe. 1995. Marijuana’s effects on actual driving performance. In: C. Kloeden and A. McLean (Eds) Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T-95. Adelaide: Australia: HHMRC Road Research Unit, University of Adelaide. Pp. 11-20.

"Anyone believing that cannabis legalisation will cause the collapse of society has only to look at the countries where it has been legalised/decriminalised to see they have lower drug crime and usage rates than we do."
Posted by penrhos July 09, 2010 at 12:51PM

So why is it that in Holland, many of the coffee bars selling cannabis have been closed down?

Obviously a typo, drinking and driving is illegal. Don't be an arse.

How many more people do you think are going to drive stoned? It would be an offence, they would be breaking the law. Why punish people who wouldn't smoke and drive? You don't do it with alcohol. It's like punishing people who put on oven mitts and handcuff their hands behind their heads, because if they did it and drove accidents would happen.

"KEELE RESEARCHERS HIT INTERNATIONAL HEADLINES

Research by a team from the School of Pharmacy, the Department of Psychiatry and the Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, commissioned by the Government's Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) to investigate trends in schizophrenia, has been widely reported in the national and international media. The ACMD wanted to ascertain whether the rate of schizophrenia in the UK had changed in recent years, possibly due to cannabis use.

A recent systematic review concluded that cannabis use increases risk of psychotic outcomes independently of confounding and transient intoxication effects. Furthermore, a model of the association between cannabis use and schizophrenia indicated that the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia would increase from 1990 onwards.

The Keele paper investigates whether this has occurred in the UK by examining trends in the annual prevalence and incidence of schizophrenia and psychoses, as measured by diagnosed cases from 1996 to 2005. The study cohort comprised almost 600,000 patients each year, representing approximately 2.3% of the UK population, aged 16 to 44. Between 1996 and 2005 the incidence and prevalence of schizophrenia and psychoses were either stable or declining. Explanations other than a genuine stability or decline were considered, but appeared less plausible. In conclusion, the study, by Dr Martin Frisher, Professor Ilana Crome, Orsolina Martino and Professor Peter Croft, did not find any evidence of increasing schizophrenia or psychoses in the general population from 1996 to 2005."

-----------------------
@gxlewis

The Lancet study you quote from was misleading as the 40% figure you quoted actually meant "40%, of the 1 to 2% of the population who are already predisposed to schizophrenia and psychosis" It does NOT mean 40% of cannabis users. If it did the Keele Report I stated above would've found evidence of it, they didn't.

The Lancet report also states their method as being, and I quote:

"We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Knowledge, ISI Proceedings, ZETOC, BIOSIS, LILACS, and MEDCARIB from their inception to September, 2006, searched reference lists of studies selected for inclusion, and contacted experts. Studies were included if longitudinal and population based. 35 studies from 4804 references were included."

They also say, and I quote:

"The uncertainty about whether cannabis causes psychosis is unlikely to be resolved by further longitudinal studies such as those reviewed here."

We can all cherry pick research and make it say whatever we want but when you look at the whole research you see it is not as convincing as first thought.

 

One more thing I would rather trust research that has looked at 600,000 patients than one that has looked at a few thousand.

Why are people saying that drinking and driving is illegal? It isn't there is an alcohol limit that determines whether you are able to drive or not, providing you are under that limit you are legal to drive.

It should only be an offense to be driving while impaired, not just driving under the influence of any substance. Drink drive laws are ridiculous as some people can be perfectly sober while failing a breath test; others can pass while be clearly impaired.
This is a distinction which is too often ignored.

Psychosis and schizophrenia are two distinct problems. You talk about cannabis psychosis and as I have already made references to studies showing the similarities between alcohol and cannabis psychosis I fail to see your problem. If alcohol use and its psychological harm do not offend your morals but cannabis use does then you are attempting to justify your stance using hypocritical arguments.

I am happy you are interested in looking at the risks of cannabis but if you do not compare those risks to those posed by alcohol you will be unable to get any sense of proportion of the risks involved.

Nothing hyprocritical about my arguments. However I am not some junkie who cherry picks available research studies in order to justify my habit.

Quite frankly if life is so sad that you have to take mind-enhancing drugs, then that is your problem. The only thing that bothers me is that it will probably be the NHS which has to pay for your medication in years to come.

In introducing the Misuse of Drugs Act in 1970, the Labour Home Secretary, James Callaghan, said:

"The object here is to make, so far as possible, a more sensible differentiation between drugs. It will divide them according to their accepted dangers and harmfulness in the light of current knowledge and it will provide for changes to be made in the classification in the light of new scientific knowledge."

Why oh why then when scientific knowledge moves on from where it was in 1970 does our government ignore it and make up a new criteria on the spot for the reason why cannabis should remain illegal...whilst all the while ignoring the scientific knowledge that has accrued over the harms of alcohol to the extent of not including it in the Act.

I am not advocating the banning of alcohol (even though I don't drink) because I believe that everyone has the choice to decide what they put in their bodies without the threat of police kicking their door in and ransacking their house. I wouldn't wish on alcohol drinkers what is perpetrated on cannabis users.

But then I'm not in the business of telling others how to run their lives, unlike the oh so perfect non cannabis users.

Oh and btw gxlewis...a cannabis user is NOT A JUNKIE!

@ gxlewis

So you’re just a troll that cherry picks scientific studies to ignore, to support your bigotry?

Now that Sativex has been passed for medical use and seeing as it is made out of the WHOLE cannabis plant, is the government finally going to take cannabis out of the schedule 1 grouping it is in at the moment...seeing as schedule 1 is for drugs with "No recognised medicinal use?"

Firstly do not insult people you do not know by calling them "junkies," it only makes you appear prejudiced. Secondly, unless your devote your life to introducing alcohol prohibition then you are liable to be called a hypocrite.

"In England, in 2007, 73% of men
and 57% of women (aged 16 and over)
reported drinking an alcoholic drink on at least
one day in the week prior to interview."
http://www.ic.nhs.uk/[…]/Final%20Format%20draft%202009%20v7.pdf

So in your opinion 73% of men and 57% of women (aged 16 and over) find "life is so sad" that they have to "take mind-enhancing drugs"?

Of COURSE it should be decriminalised. It's absurd to maintain the illegality of cannabis alongside the perfectly legal use of the biggest killer, tobacco.

@gxlewis.

Yes, The Dutch are closing some coffeeshops, they have changed the regulations so any near schools have to close, so do ones where criminal involvement have been proven.

There is another reason that some are closing and that is drug tourism - they want to reduce the number of outlets. This is mainly due to presure from France who are sick of people crossing into holland and coming back into France with Cannabis, this is again due to prohibition not a problem with Dutch cannabis users.

In the end the number of coffeeshops in holland is un-important as they can grow a limited number of plants for personal consumption so can grow their own!

Another new survey supports legalisation & regulation by the government instead of the current system.

http://markreckons.blogspot[…]hows-70-of-people-want.html

I won't get hung up on moral arguments as they shouldn't infuence policy or laws.

I am not a stoner or junkie I am someone who strongly believes in personal freedom & personal responsibility. If you are a responsible member of society and act responsibly then you should be allowed to do whatever you want to in your spare time provided you do not harm others or society & take personal responsibility for whatever happens to you.

What is the other option - leave it as it is where criminals have the power, the money, our childerns minds & futures in their hands?

Nice to see the tenuous psychosis issue is still being batted around.

The hypocrisy of this argument never fails to amaze me.

Once more, google Korsakoff's syndrome, to suggest cannabis carries a bigger risk of psychosis is an insult to the families and loved ones who have suffered from DIRECT link alcohol psychosis. Society has a far greater threat of mental illness, to deflect onto cannabis is simply not helping anyone and shameful of decent society. By comparison, cannabis poses an insignificant threat to all aspects health, not just mental.

If we were to start the drug classification all over again, there would be no doubt there would be a role reversal and alcohol would be defending its honour on here.

The point is though, taking all other quibbles aside; cannabis is here, it is prevalent, it is funding a massive criminal underbelly that will get more powerful with each passing day in a depression. The police numbers are to go down. Do any reasonable citizens really want resources to go on fighting cannabis when we are (and will be) stretched to the limit? This is simply an unsafe ethos to us all. Take control now, and you will aid every part of society. It is here and not going away, it's as simple as that.

You have hit the nail on the head there....

Our local police have been told to expect 600-800 posts to go so what happens????

There was a cannabis bust near where I live and 20 police, some armed smashed down someones front door and arrested their son for a few plants - he will now get a criminal record and be introduced to the criminal system, criminals etc and loose any chance of getting a good job or do anything requiring a CRB check.

This is not justice - This is a waste of Police manpower - This is not finacially viable - This has got to stop.

@penrhos

They used 15 officers for this: http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/[…]/article.html

Good job I'm growing peppers in my back garden then.... They don't look anything like tomatoe plants.

This is the one that sticks out to me:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/[…]/8499722.stm

A breakdown of the figures:

9 arrested, no actual proven cannabis found, it was "suspected cannabis that was taken away from tests" and how many officers were needed? 100. One hundred police officers.

Once more, thank you L.E.A.P and the brave men and women of the police force for speaking out that this is a waste of your resources. Perhaps if the general public are not listened to then the police will be.

a new poll survey says 70% of people want cannabis to be legalized.
link:
http://markreckons.blogspot[…]hows-70-of-people-want.html

A victimless crime

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]me-lines-as-the-netherlands

Just to join in on the waste of police resources idea, in the above linked article 300 officers over 6 days netted £5000 of drugs in a general crackdown around Exeter.

The comments on the article have already taken the liberty of doing the math and concluded almost £184,000 was wasted for this paltry return.

I totally appreciate people have concerns about the criminal activities of dealers and drug users etc. However a legalised system similar to the Dutch or Portugese model does work and would have almost totally negated what in my opinion is a total waste of police time in this case.

I would add however that the large scale wholesale/commercial supply is still illegal in Holland where I firmly believe it should be licensed and regulated. This is one of the reasons why Dutch Coffee shops have been closing down due to criminal activity associated with the wholesale supply market that is still allowed to continue. The Dutch model is very flawed in this way.

Top to bottom regulation is the only SOLUTION for all drugs.

http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/[…]/article.html

See link above, posted the wrong one initially.

regulate, educate , or is it better criminals and children control it what ever the law ? considering thats where the harm lies!

look at the unbiased evidence before you spill more lies , you look stupid when i can sit here on my computer and find everything i need to know , old fashioned scare mongering doesn't work , prohibition doesn't work ...... regulation does , fact

prohibition is the only experiment that is tuned by the negitive results of its own creation to determin all future input , thus creating an ouroboros paradox, counter productive measures implemented by those who want your tax, Gordon's stone soup logic , school boy error

if we was to use the Dutch model we could do one better and regulate supply removing all criminal connection , them "dope heads " wont look so lazy then , but i know all them leech agencies and deluded followers will kick up a stink when they can no longer launder our tax through the industry they have built themselves through lobby /scare mongering! ,,billions

http://www.youtube.com/watc[…]amp;feature=player_embedded

cant wait for the UK vid to be released very informative

all drugs should be legal. I should be able to do anything I want with mine own body.
Screw cannabis.
All drugs.

we should do better than holland i think. we should legalize all drugs, we shouldnt only decriminalise them because it is still against the human rights to punish someone who chooses drugs as a way to relax rather than drink alcohol.

As far as I'm concerned, it should remain illegal. consider all the things that could be so much more dangerous when done under the influence of cannabis. I know this argument also applies to alcohol, but I'm glad to see the government proposes reducing the drink driving limit as well.

@madman0908

Ok I'm considering....nope not come up with anything.
Care to enlighten us?

OK, the belief that;
"it should remain illegal. consider all the things that could be so much more dangerous when done under the influence of cannabis."
First of all this suggests cannabis makes people as dangerous or more so than alcohol when undertaking dangerous activities like a driving a car. To this I say look at the studies conducted by the US and UK transport departments:
http://www.druglibrary.org/[…]/driving.htm (US) and
http://webarchive.nationala[…]rivingareviewoft4764?page=1 (UK)
(“Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. “ U.S. Department of Transportation document)
Secondly, it suggests you believe that cannabis use is lower than it would be if it were legalised, though the evidence from the Netherlands (where cannabis is decriminalised) shows cannabis use is going down (it has been lower than the usage rate of the UK for a while).
Thirdly, it suggests your happy to criminalise millions of British citizens, allow organised crime to profit from a multi billion pound black-market whilst spending billions of pounds of tax on police, courts, prisons etc. just because a few idiots try to operate dangerous equipment when they really should not.

Congratulations though, you have just provided the least convincing argument for cannabis prohibition available. Don't feel insulted, you are not the only person to put forward such a belief but your unsubstantiated beliefs are not a good basis for laws. Driving under the influence is an offence and I hope it stays that way. But, I still hope cannabis is legalised.

The present situation is truly insane. Two incredibly destructive, carcinogenic drugs are legal, killing large numbers yearly, while a relatively harmless plant, which shows huge potential in fighting cancer and which is proven to help many medical conditions has been illegal for decades.
I can't help feeling it's all about the money. Those poor pharmaceutical giants just aren't making quite enough cash.
Don't worry, as long as the world's media keeps ignoring this plant's proven benefits then Bayer's stocks and shares should be safe.

Those against legalization have little to stand on. Their arguments hold no currency at all. Any inteligent person would agree that one should not operate heavy machinery or drive a car under the influence of anything. We are not debating for the purposes of legalizing driving when under the influence of cannabis, although I can tell you that it is much more safer than driving drunk or even sober believe it or not.

We wish that this government listens. Its a shame that we have to state the obvious to them. That is that the current system does more damage than good. The current age to buy cannabis is 10 pounds and responsible government would allow this to continue. So legalize cannabis and let people enjoy growing cannabis also. IF you support the situation as it is them you are blind, very blind indeed. I am a cannabis eater and smoker and I also enjoy red wine and beer. No one will tell me what I can and can not put into my body. If this government want to get serious then LEGALIZE, TAX and REGULATE to CONTROL CANNABIS and safe the country billions.

NO NEED FOR SPENDING CUTS AS THE ANSWER IS RIGHT HERE.

And for those against legalization and those entertaining the cannabis smoker stereotype, wake up. You will find a majority of cannabis smokers have a high IQ are prefessionals and very nice people who enjoy to unwind or be productive under the influence of this amazing herb. I am an architect with my own practice and not a junkie as some of these ill informed people like to think.

Replying to this thread as it is most popular, but strongly advocate going a lot further. A Dutch-style 'back door' policy would be a welcome start, but only as a first step in ending the unregulated prohibition free-for-all and replacing it with a system of strong government regulation and taxation that ensures purity, known strength, and adult-only sales. Cut the link between soft and hard drugs, and medicalise the use of addictive substances to remove the markets of the gangsters and pushers. This government wants to save money, but continues to spend billions on the pantomime horses of counter-productive prohibitions that make things worse, not better.

Its funny when they say that they have put a dent in the cannabis indusrty. For every plant they destroy there are another 100 plants thriving. People are growing everywhere.

The link between cannabis and mental health issues is very weak. My brother is a respected psychologist and psychotherapist who has 20 years of practice up his sleave not only in the UK but in the USA. In all his years of practice he told me he never saw one case of cannabis induced schitzophrenia. His patients used cannabis to control the condition. The condition was already latent and usually came about through excessive alcohole abuse. But because the government and related bodies bribe health professional to LIE in order to SCARE people we now have this myth. BUT IT IS NOT THE TRUTH.

Bad parenting, alcohole, television, popular culture were all much larger contributing factors than cannabis ever could be.

CANNABIS IS SAFE

PROHABITION IS MURDER

NICK AND DAVID, ARE YOU GOING TO TO THE RIGHT THING OR DO YOU SUPPORT GANGS, GUNS AND MURDER?

DO YOU CARE?

LISTEN TO US PLEASE.

http://www.drugequality.org[…]tion_Consultation_Paper.pdf

I can waffle forever about the contents of the above PDF, it is the now complete Draft of a Public consultation paper that was mothballed by the labour Gov.

See Page 15, section 6.8 for some interesting reading.

Many thanks for all the hard work at the Drug Equality Alliance in persuing this documents full release.

One way forward could be to discuss the issues and questions raised within this paper as I'm sure the resulting debate would be most relevant.

There has not, in the UK, been any attempt to impose controls
comparable to illicit drugs where it would be an offence to possess and
supply alcohol and tobacco. The social acceptability of, for example,
alcohol would make such controls unacceptable to the majority who use
alcohol responsibly and therefore impractical. But alcohol and tobacco
account for more health problems and deaths than illicit drugs. To many
young people this presents problems in understanding the rationale
behind controlling drugs such as cannabis and ecstasy when their
misuse contributes less overall harm to society than widely available
drugs such as alcohol and tobacco.

done

I would like to present my next piece of evidence towards the decriminalisation of Cannabis...

GW Pharmicuticles.

They take Skunk cannabis, grind up the whole plant (not roots) & use alcohol to extract THC, CBD & CBN from the plant and convert it into a spray.

This process is in line with making "Isolator hash" or "Hash oil" for those that have been to Amsterdam or are up on their cannabis terminoligy - This would also explain why some users that were fine with herbal cannabis (15-25% THC) have issues with Sativex (60% THC).

Sativex also costs significantly more than the cannabis needed to make it - so BIG PROFITS for GW Pharm' and their shareholders (read MP's, financial institutions, etc).

GW Pharm' would not have been given a license to sell Sativex in the UK unless it passed safety trials - therefore Cannabis must be safe to use.

GW Pharm' share price rocketed when the license for Sativex was granted for the UK.

At this point I think "CONSPIRACY"........

So the "Evil Skunk" is not Evil at all if in the hands of big business that lobbies MP's - It is highly profitable. But for joe-public it is evil and only profitable for organised crime.

I rest my case.

Cannabis should be made legal because there is no crime in taking it and no crime in growing it. the goverment can make alot of money from it in tax and they could use that money for the greater good. it will also create jobs if made legal. by keeping it ilegal gangs are making a huge profit and there fore allow them to buy weapons or class A drugs. make it legal solve problems. keeping it ilegal creates problems.

it would seem that the majority of the british public want cannabis to be legal, so if the government completely ignore this , it shows that this website is a farce and the government dont really care about what we think. time will tell.

Decriminalising cannabis would certainly be beneficial to the country in the sense that if participaters could smoke in coffee shops it would take a large element of public use of the streets and into a safe environment. Cost's to the police due to cannabis related issues would plumit. More education could be provided through income gained from tax. It would also pritty much illiminate the black market for the drug, therefore reducing crime greatly.

in all seriousnuss there are a lot of benefits from this, a lot.

cannabis does have its victims, but it is even more grounds for legalizing it. There is a connection between the slave trade and drugs.

Criminal gangs bring in illegal immigrants at high prices they are unable to pay off. They often go into the sex trade, but there is another situation - grow houses. The criminals rent property in suburban areas, pack an immigrant family into one room and have the rest of the house made into a cannabis factory.

There is often cannabis coming from abroad, where criminal gangs are using the money they make to buy weapons. Legalizing cannabis growth and making it available in licenced areas will massively cut demand of these import goods. This could save lives. The people who are already smoking cannabis can stop associating with the criminals, the police have more time to catch the dangerous criminals and the government can get a much needed boost to their income.

So cannabis is no longer one of the most popular tags eh? Interesting to say the least, seeing as it was number 2 this morning.

Don't want people to see these threads, Dave? Nick?

They won't reply, you know that! I'm wondering who's forcing what one can and cannot see on this website...

Note to the moderators.

Please can you replace the cannabis tag that you've taken down. The call to repeal the cannabis laws is a SEPARATE issue to repealing of the laws for all drugs.

People MUST have the option to view these threads, you can see how popular they are for pete's sake.

Thank you

Please restore the Cannabis tag.

It is one of the most popular subjects on this site and so there is no excuse in taking the tag down (and blocking voting/commenting on ideas etc..)

We're being ignored once again!

wether its illegal or legal, people are going to be able to easily get hold of it and smoke it.

be responsible and Legalise it!

Why? :

-stop children using it
-stop waisting police time/funding
-huge revenue in tax
-open up a new industry (new jobs)
-free up prison space for serious criminals
- No victim , No crime

Don't decriminalise it, legalise it.
Criminalise the creation of victimless crimes.

What is required is NOT decriminalisation, it is LEGALISATION.

Cannabis, and indeed all recreational drugs, should be legally traded and taxed just like alcohol and tobacco.

Please restore the Cannabis tag.

I've contacted admin about the missing tag...dunno if it'll do any good.

Kinda feels like we're being shunted into a darkened corner fine we'll just shout louder...WE WILL NOT GO AWAY!

Indeed, this doesn't look good at all for liberty.

I guess we're gripped by big business more than we all realised. It's going to take a brave bunch of men and women to break this cycle.

Woo Hoo....the tag is back!

Thank you admin or moderators.

According to the mods the tags are selected by the number of tags there are - so make sure all the threads with cannabis references in are tagged "cannabis" and the tag should not disapear.

Precaution or perversion: eight harms of the precautionary principle

23/06/2010 by pr David Nutt.

The precautionary principle is frequently invoked in relation to drugs laws. The argument goes like this: if we are unsure of the risks of harms of a drug then it is safer to ban it as a precaution rather than wait until harms become apparent. As a principle, it is based on the supposition that since there are assumed to be no benefits of “illegal” drugs then banning them will have no downside or ‘disbenefits’ with the anticipated result that the banning of them will be beneficial to society and to users.

At face value, the precautionary principle seems reasonable but, as I argued in the Eve Saville lecture at the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies last year, it is fraught with hidden harms and injustices especially if applied in an unthinking and arbitrary manner.

Here are eight examples where the precautionary principle with drugs falls down:

1. Increases personal harms
The penalties enforced in the banning legislation may cause more harm than the drug itself: a criminal record or even imprisonment for cannabis possession will almost certainly be more damaging to the individual and society than the drug itself. Criminalising users to deter them and others is the central plank of the current legislation that makes cannabis a Class B drug and the explicit reason why it was regraded up to Class B last year. This damages users who are caught in possession as it limits their career opportunities and is particularly hurtful to those using for medicinal reasons. It also costs the public purse large amounts through police and court time and prison costs - which was one reason why cannabis was downgraded to Class C in the first place!

2. Distorts markets to greater harm to society
When precaution results in a variety of different drugs being made illegal then markets and competition between them develop. There are incentives for drug dealers to sell the most profitable, most addictive and least likely to be detected drugs. This pushes the market in the direction of drugs such as heroin and crack which use small volumes and have no odour and away from cannabis which is bulkier and smelly. The harms of the former are much greater than those of cannabis yet the penalties for possession and supply are similar [7-v-5 years and life-v- 14 years respectively]. There are examples of young people initiating illegal drug use with heroin rather than cannabis simply because cannabis is harder to get hold of and deaths have been the result.
 
3. Impossibility to refute
When the precautionary principle is used to deal with a concern for health effects of drugs, such concerns can never by fully allayed since any drug can be associated with harms of some sort if widely enough used. There is therefore always justification for maintaining precautions and keeping drugs illegal. This was the basis of the last government’s decision to keep ecstasy Class A even though the evidence of harm was clearly much less than with other Class A drugs such as heroin and crack. Although the immediate harms were not as severe as Class A drugs, the Home Secretary said that there were concerns about the long-term effects so it would consequently not be downgraded. Not much consolation to the many people in prison for up to 5 years for possession of ecstasy for personal use – an unlikely and unknown long-term possible health consequence is given as justification for an immediate destruction of liberty and livelihood.

4. Disproportionate penalities
The precautionary principle also fails to take into account the proportionate risks from drugs and the absolute level of risk that should be required to ban a drug. I have argued that some metric of harm developed in reference to other harmful behaviours e.g. horse riding, rock climbing or sun-tanning should be invoked as a threshold of risk to decide if any drug should be made illegal. Some argue that as illegal drugs have no value then there are no dis-benefits of banning them. The flaw in this argument vis a vis criminalisation has been made in Point 1.

5. Entrenchment of a flawed institutionalised moral position on drugs
Precaution is often either overtly or subconsciously based on the argument there are no benefits to the use of the drug so that it should therefore be made illegal. This argument reflects a biased and entrenched institutional position that the establishment and law makers alone understand costs and benefits and that drug users are all dependent, addicted losers. In fact, most people who use illegal drugs do so because they want to, NOT because they are addicted. For those for whom illegal drug use is a choice, benefits include relaxation, dancing, mind expansion etc; these are real benefits/motivators that should not be ignored by legislators

6. Encourages other drug use
The most costly and perverse consequence of the precautionary principle is that it encourages the use of legal drugs which are more harmful than the ones being banned. It can be argued that the epidemic of alcohol-related health harms that the UK is experiencing now is partly driven by people who might use drugs that are safer than alcohol, such as cannabis and ecstasy, being deterred by the risks of criminalisation and/or misinformation about the relative harms of these drugs, so are driven to drinking instead. It is seriously questionable whether there is any health justification for criminalising the use of drugs that are safer than alcohol. Punishing drug users - but not drinkers or tobacco smokers - to protect them and society from health harms is ineffective, uneconomic, morally indefensible and patently unjust. The growing use of cannabis in retired people in the USA when they no longer have to fear workplace drug-testing reflects the true deterrent effects of the law to limit free choice.

7. Blocks new drug discovery
The precautionary principle also limits the development of new drugs that might be safer than alcohol – such as alcohol alternatives – which would be subject to a much higher level of safety than alcohol itself.

8. Denies innovation and medical progress
Some drugs, particularly LSD, MDMA and psilocybin, were showing promise as therapeutic agents before they were made illegal. This research then stopped as a consequence and only now, 40 years on is being resurrected with very promising findings. The recent banning of mephedrone means that new antidepressants and other treatments e.g. for obesity and narcolepsy that might have emerged from that chemical series will now not happen. It is not that such drugs would necessarily be illegal but the regulatory and legal complexities of working in this chemical arena and the possibility that new drugs might be outlawed if legislation changes in the future provides too big a disincentive to the pharmaceutical industry.

Drugs present a variety of dangers to those that take them – however, using the precautionary principle as the basis for prohibition risks creating unnecessary harms without properly protecting users. If we are going to have a coherent and effective strategy to tackle the problems that drugs cause, removing the harms caused by the precautionary principle must be a priority.

http://s321561233.websitehome.co.uk/

OK - which smart-arse has been tagging flags with "MOJ"

I agree - legalise or decriminalise

Dear Mods, Thanks for putting the 'drug' and 'cannabis' tags back. We really appreciate it.

I don't understand why it's illegal in the first place, I can see why people who sell it should be fined, but putting people in prison for a completely victimless crime, purely based a choice that they should have the right to make is ridiculous.
Think how much police time could be saved for dealing with way more important issues if they weren't making criminals out of innocent smokers. Also, the amount of money having Amsterdam coffee shop style places in the country would bring in would help solve the national debt in itself.

Decriminalisation maintains many of the disadvantages of prohibition without offering the advantages of traceability and accountability.

Legalisation and reform of the Drugs Act is optimal.

I totally agree

As far as I'm aware, alcohol will do more damage mentally and physically to someone than what cannabis could. Addiction to alcohol is also higher than cannabis. People become much more violent when under the influence of alcohol.

Obviously, if it it legalised (which it should be!), there would need to be taxes on it as there are on tobacco and alcohol. And then there would also be certain restrictions (such as minimum age, penalties for driving whilst under the influence etc).

Making people aware of what it could do to you in the long run is also be something that would need to be done - as is done with alcohol and tobacco.

Personally I don't see what the difference between tobacco and cannabis is on the whole - it is something that can very easily damage your body if consumed in large quantities. But has this made tobacco illegal?...

Do people agree that we should change this idea to

LEGALIZE CANNABIS.

Message to the moderator:

Dear moderator,

Can you pleaase give us some indication as to when we will have any feedback with regards to our intelligent ideas for ending prohabition of cannabis. This is an extreamely important issue and we wish to hear back personally from either David or Nick. We would like to see cannabis LEGAL in the next 6 months and think it is reasonable that you push this through right away.

Please start to impliment these changes in the law.

Thank you

dont decriminalize but legalize

agreed zoubl. However: "dont spam but discuss"

I'm glad that people understand that decriminilisation is simply a politically appealing means of appeasing the many, whilst retaining the criminal entities. This half-way-house could be damaging to the overall aims of creating an environment whereby drug use is a public health issue and not a criminal issue.
Legalisation is the simple answer to removing the black market.

I'm totally fed up with the legislation on Cannabis. I now pay an extortionate amount for very little and I also have the added risk of purchasing cannabis that has been sprayed with God knows what (silicon, glass etc.) I, like many others, am the sort of person who needs a release in order to relax fully of an evening. I can either smoke a joint or, consume a bottle (or so) of wine. My belly, my liver, my wife and I are quite aware of what we'd prefer.

If I was free to grow for personal use I'd be so content. I wouldn't be harming anyone, I wouldn't be rotting my liver and my wife would find me far more attractive without my gut. I wouldn't be putting money in the pockets of drug dealers. If it was legal, I probably wouldn't suffer so much from one of the negative side effects: paranoia :)

Please legalise. It's just a flowering plant that makes you feel mellow when consumed, and I LIKE to feel mellow and relaxed after a hard days work.

Please legalise!

The reason most cannabis smokers suffer from parranoia is because of the laws not because of cannabis.

Decriminalisation of possession with a 5 plant limit for personal grows would be a result that MP's could probably get past the media with little trouble - Full legalisation which would effectively "Normalise" cannabis would be the ultimate prize for users (and Billions of pounds of extra revenue for the state).

I have a seriously hard time understanding why cannabis is illegal or criminalized. It's non addictive, it has a low effect on health when smoked ( lower than tobacco ). It can help with MANY illnesses, and can help to reduce stress in every day life greatly. You don't even need to smoke it, you can eat it and remove just about any health risks.

If it were legalized it would reduce crime ( no dealers selling cannabis, less money to criminals ) and reduce the use of other drugs as people would not need to go to a dealer who offers them other harder drugs in order to obtain it. Lots of people would take cannabis instead of drinking, reducing more crime. When you're stoned on cannabis you don't want to fight or act like an idiot ( not saying all people who drink do, but many will ) - you just want to sit and relax.

It could be taxed and controlled - creating more money for the government which would help bring the economy back and reduce the government's debt.

I see no drawbacks of legalizing the drug. Or at least decriminalizing it so that people can grow it at home for personal use.

Summary:

1)Non-addictive.
2)Better for health than tobacco or alcohol.
3)Can help many illnesses.
4)Can reduce stress.
5)Legalization will reduce crime - less money going to crime through drug dealing.
6)Legalization will reduce the use of other harder drugs as people will not need to go to a dealer who offers such drugs to get cannabis.
7)Taxation of the drug could create a large revenue for the government, helping with the economy and reducing debt.

Sorry, my last comment was paragraphed in the input box - apparently the formatting did not stay ... shame, it made it much more readable.

Message to the moderator: Dear moderator, Can you pleaase give us some indication as to when we will have any feedback with regards to our intelligent ideas for ending prohabition of cannabis. This is an extreamely important issue and we wish to hear back personally from either David or Nick. We would like to see cannabis LEGAL in the next 6 months and think it is reasonable that you push this through right away. Please start to impliment these changes in the law. Thank you

I'd also like to add that you cannot overdose on cannabis and that to my knowledge no one has died due to taking it. Think of the thousands of people that die each year due to alcohol and tobacco.

I agree with decriminalisation but I believe it should be done within a regulatory framework that allows tax to be levied and any particularly dangerous varieties to be restricted, rather than the rather hap-hazard turning a blind eye approach that has been followed in Netherlands.

The fundamental points of the poster stand however. There is very little evidence that cannabis of any form is dangerous, and what limited evidence there is only relates to a small number of high strength varieties, which could be restricted as part of any recriminalisation. Even if there is a risk associated with smoking cannabis, experience has already shown that prohibition does not work. It has proven ineffective at stopping people from using the drug, while criminalising a huge number of otherwise law abiding people.

The strength of the strain is not so much of an issue ... it will just get you high in less time with less smoking required. It's just the same as any other strain only with a higher percentage of THC.

You can smoke lots of weak cannabis and the effect will be the same as smoking a little bit of strong cannabis. Although there will be variations in the effect it has depending on the strain ... IE, weather it is a more bodily high, a couch-pin high or a creative high. Things like that.

I agree, stop these stupid laws.

Have you read this idea: KEEP DRUGS ILLEGAL SO THAT I DONT HAVE TO WORK!

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]egal-so-i-dont-have-to-work

This is brilliant and must be read by all opposing the legalization of this amazing herb.

^ agreed ^

the moderator here keeps stopping everyone from voting on the posts that they want to, i don't know why but it's not right, leave people to vote on what they like, mine was closed after a few hours! so here it is again...... by Zog on July 14, 2010 at 03:20AM Prohibition doesn't work!! - Regulate cannabis!! we need solid regulation on cannabis and that doesn't mean regulate it strictly and only make cannabis available that has 3% THC as this or similar would just drive it back to the black market and dealers would be back selling to kids, NO!!, proper regulation is the answer! just like tobacco and alcohol is now!! plus the dealers would be no more,the police could actually catch real criminals and be supported by more people instead of wasting time and money on small busts that net 8 plants etc.. Plus the financial gains to be made from the legal sale of cannabis for our country is huge and could contribute to cutting our massive debt that is currently choking our precious country! Prohibition is not working and does not work at all, it's been tried and tested for years and years now but the result ends up the same, people know the effects of cannabis and they know its not even close to being half as bad as cigarettes and alcohol despite what the government may think or say,and might i add that this view comes from the government not listening to professionals and the people when they state the true facts, you will see the peoples view on this in the reflection of votes when the time comes, people just need that chance to honestly give there opinions without ridicule from authority's or anyone else. The government should have regulated this a long time ago, they just won't listen to reason, well maybe now they will? but i won't hold my breath! Thank you to nick clegg for creating this site so that we the people can have our say, i just hope it gets read and not ignored as do many. There's plenty more to say about this subject but I'll leave that for others with more knowledge to add.... Thanks for reading!

Tax and regulate like alcohol and tobacco because Drug Dealers dont ask for I.D.

Regulate cannabis like alcohol & tobacco, tax it, take users out the hands of dealers - it's just so obviously sensible.

µ

i think we could do better than holland. regulate tax and stop the war on drugs in general.

right we should not follow holland on this one , coffee shops fine , but we need full legalization with it.

Sign the Vienna declaration!
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/[…]/?action_KEY=2794

See this informative video below:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/[…]/param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/91[…]GB&amp;fs=1?rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/[…]/param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/91[…]GB&amp;fs=1?rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Watch this informative video above.

Please sign the Vienna Declaration below:
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/[…]/?action_KEY=2794

close postings, nice idea, shite site,

Sativex is licensed in the UK so why is Cannabis still a schedule 1 drug?

Info

by penrhos on July 14, 2010 at 09:48PM

Now that Sativex has been passed for medical use and seeing as it is made out of the WHOLE cannabis plant, is the government finally going to take cannabis out of the schedule 1 grouping.

Seeing as schedule 1 is for drugs with "No recognised medicinal use?

This is removing the "Human right" to a pain free existance & removing any hope of legally self-medicating.

Most LHA's wont supply Sativex due to the high cost and "other issues"

So cannabis is clearly not a schedule 1 drug based on evidence from "GW Pharmaceuticals plc" themselves...

These links all prove that cannabis has many safe medicinal benefits so why is it still illegal?

http://www.gwpharm.com/sativex.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/history.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/cannabinoids-science.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/product-pipeline.aspx

by penrhos on July 14, 2010 at 09:48PM

Now that Sativex has been passed for medical use and seeing as it is made out of the WHOLE cannabis plant, is the government finally going to take cannabis out of the schedule 1 grouping.

Seeing as schedule 1 is for drugs with "No recognised medicinal use?

This is removing the "Human right" to a pain free existance & removing any hope of legally self-medicating.

Most LHA's wont supply Sativex due to the high cost and "other issues"

So cannabis is clearly not a schedule 1 drug based on evidence from "GW Pharmaceuticals plc" themselves...

These links all prove that cannabis has many safe medicinal benefits so why is it still illegal?

http://www.gwpharm.com/sativex.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/history.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/cannabinoids-science.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/product-pipeline.aspx

 
Why the contribution is important

As an illegal Class-B (Schedule-1) drug cannabis has a 14 year maximum sentence.

Possession of an un-licensed firearm has a 5 year maximum sentence.

This is clearly wrong and cannabis should be legalised for medicinal use NOW.

This would also need the Possession laws to be scrapped or amended so it is no longer a crime to possess cannabis for personal use.

 Posted by johnsmith137 July 14, 2010 at 22:35
the granny in Cumbria would now not get a trial by jury, as the jury would now be confused by the legal/medical evidence, better just to lock her up for questioning those who make the law an ass. Neuropathic pain is a problem for a lot of old folk, but some old folk have shares in big-Pharma so their OK then, they can have a massage at their local spa. poor old folk are left with a sponge bath by strangers call-cramming , class war no, "progress and poverty"

 Posted by johnsmith137 July 14, 2010 at 22:37
about time 3% growth is not sustainable so lets chill and enjoy

 Posted by johnsmith137 July 14, 2010 at 22:39
i meant endure more pain and work till we drop, sorry sanity check

 Posted by zoubi July 14, 2010 at 22:44
its all about money man. the governement is saying here you are allowed to buy cannabis from us but if we catch you buying it elsewhere or growing you are a criminal and we need to put you in jail. shows you that those who make laws are dumbasses

should have left this nut in the bin

 Posted by JRPENNWHIT July 15, 2010 at 00:18
Although I sympathise with those in pain, decriminalising cannabis and allowing it to be classed as a medicine rather than a class B drug isn’t the answer. A change in the law such as this in my opinion sends out the wrong message. All it does it create a loophole for those who smoke it, to allow them to continue to smoke when and where they want as they will be able to carry it on there person. it sends out a message to the vulnerable in our society by pretending to be a medicine that’s good for you??? If you encourage people to smoke it, you will end up with more people with mental problems and a more lethargic citizens who can’t be bothered to work. This in turn costs the tax payer more money.

 Posted by Meekman2010 July 15, 2010 at 00:49
@JRPENNWHIT Im afraid your view here is very misguided. First of all im assuming you drink alcohol so i would appreciate you to not talk as if you hold any sort of moral high ground, as what you consume a. kills thousands of people as opposed to cannabis's 0/zero/none death rate ever. Secondly you are making a sweeping statement suggesting people who smoke cannabis, are 'lethargic citizens who can't be bothered to work' firstly i would appreciate you to put down the newspaper, switch off the t.v and do some research, Bill gates smokes cannabis and from what i've read he isn't that unmotivated. Secondly you are assuming people smoke cannabis are all lazy, when infact vast majority of people who smoke carry on normal lives, it is the equivalent of going to the pub or having a drink after work, your not making statements saying these people are violant alcoholics. Furthermore by legalising something you are not in any form encouraging or condoning use, look at both cigarettes and alcohol which are not condoned, but legal and come with health warnings. You made the point referring to mental problems, by which i assume you mean schizophrenia, this statistic is flawed because its firstly very minute 1 in 10000 people, secondly those who develop it have a pre-disposition to the to dis-order i.e they are likely to develop it. Furthermore the CBD content in cannabis combats schizophrenia but its not engineered to have a high content of the chemical because its only grown for strength by dealers, legalisation would change this. If you tax it, it pays for itself. Your argument also relies on the notion by keeping it illegal, it somehow minimising how available it is, when it could not be more available, as the moment your in secondary school it is easier to get some weed than a bottle of vodka because it is unregulated. I would appreciate a reply, and any comments i would gladly keep on with this discussion as, i would prefer to bring you round to the idea and flawed logic in prohibition (i.e prohibition in the 1930's) then alienate you.

 Posted by liltimmy July 15, 2010 at 02:39
@JRPENNWHIT : you realize that prohibition of cannabis causes 75% of all cannabis harms, the other 25% is down to lack of education thanks to suppression through a prohibition model , resulting in an overdose of misinformation , THC kills cancer cell without harming healthy cells and has been recognized to be a helpful cure for over 3000 ailments but the prohibition model suppresses it , fabric , food , much more its the top in every product class but suppressed because of ignorance and drug class whatever without regulation the circle of ouroboros is complete , the harms to prove there are harms are created by prohibition and those who support prohibition and they call stoners dopes , you have the information at your fingertips , compare the prohibition model v's the regulation model !

 Posted by homegrownoutlaw July 15, 2010 at 02:41
@JRPENNWHIT I'll be concise as we've done the figures and research to death on here now, but "mental health problems" the figure is out of 6.2 million people 800 are at "casual" risk, indeed, the link has still not been found, you'll notice the newspapers will say "could" "maybe" at risk. That's the fundamentals of this. And look up Korsakoff's syndrome, it is alcohol's version of mental health issue, you are at far far greater risk from direct alcohol related mental, and physical health, than cannabis can ever be. Also, this was found the other day to why cannabis is illegal and alcohol isn't: http://www.drugequality.org/ico_press_release.htm Can't argue that we've all been lied to really. On sativex though this quote stands out: "My professional view of cannabis as a substance is that it appears to be a remarkably safe substance in comparison to most medicines prescribed today. The more I learn about this plant the more fascinated I become. It has through its various constituents multiple effects of therapeutic interest, many of which are now being validated by the enormous growth in basic cannabinoid research." - Dr Geoffrey Guy, Chairman of GW Pharmaceuticals.

 Posted by Rationalist July 15, 2010 at 03:31
People like JRPENNWHIT just make me want to bang my head against a brick wall! Even after the voluminous pages of empirically focused evidence herein and also the evidence linked to with this very post, some people just will not listen to reason, let alone naked & blinding truth. It's OK for him to have a glass of wine but not for others to have a joint. It doesn't matter that 40% of A & E is taken up by alcohol abuse because that's legal. Under no circumstances should a drug with not a single death attributed to it be made legal however because apparently that will take up to many A&E beds and cost us a load of money that we haven't got. Ummm, wait a minute, does something sound a little contradictory to you? Doesn't it sound like alcohol is doing everything that Mr. Pennwhit hates and despises? In other words, he should be backing cannabis legalisation for the very reasons that he states it should be kept illegal. It would free up A & E, minimise NHS expenditure and liberate millions of perfectly decent people to live the life that he so enjoys but is so unwilling to share.

 Posted by Meekman2010 July 15, 2010 at 12:08
@Rationalist, i share your pain !

this is just not going to work as it get full and fat.......

 Posted by moderator_moj July 15, 2010 at 12:27
Thanks for taking the time to post your idea. Your idea is similar to others on the website. To keep the discussion going in the one place, please add any further comments to one of the ideas below, which have a higher number of comments. http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]me-lines-as-the-netherlands http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]ecreational-and-medical-use We have closed this idea for comment and voting.

why not close this idea and the rest,
man in the suit, he going to say sorry to those in prison?
a u-turn in policy?, never going to happen!,
cognitive dissonance insures that,
not sure what it is try
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
or better still
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias

remember it's a boot crushing a face forever,
this is just another way to flush out the **** under the bed

best gov is least gov, who said that?

Legalise the growing and recreational use of cannabis

Info

by Pastorius on July 15, 2010 at 02:54PM

It's all in the title.

Why should the government be entitled to interfere when an activity affects no-one but the person performing that activity?
Why the contribution is important

Any government that supports prohibition supports an outdated puritanical law that clearly makes no difference to vast swathes of people. Anybody who supports prohibition (the government included) is responsible for:

1) Inflated prices for cannabis, a 'risk tax' if you will. Straight into criminal gang's pockets.

2) No age limits for the purchase of cannabis. Black market drug dealers do not ask for ID, only cash.

3) Contamination of cannabis. Anyone who has skimmed the topic knows that cannabis is sometimes contaminated with glass/lead and various other substances to boost the weight of the product. Under a legalised system random tests could be made, and people would have an easier choice to buy from someone who doesn't contaminate their weed.

4) Mistrust in the law. When someone is growing up and they get overblown (sometimes straight false) warnings from things like 'Talk to Frank' etc, when they discover that weed isn't in fact as harmful as it is made out to be by the media and the government, why would they trust them when told to avoid other drugs?

5) The gateway effect. What little evidence there is for the gateway effect is not related to 'wanting a better high', otherwise everyone who drinks alcohol or coffee would be smack addicts by now. By forcing users to buy from drug dealers, they are exposed to more addictive drugs that are pushed because they are more profitable.

6) Criminalisation of millions. Millions of Britons are classed as criminals because they took part in an activity that affects nobody but themselves. These black marks stay with you forever.

 

Anyone who looks into the matter can see that keeping cannabis illegal for growth and recreational use is unfeasible, expensive, immoral, hypocritical, just plain wrong. Please Mr Cameron, Mr Clegg, don't keep the charade any longer. Even good old Dave got caught with it in school, so it clearly didn't do him that much harm!

Is this idea inappropriate? Report this idea to a moderator
Current tags

    * cannabis
    * legalise
    * legalise cannabis
    * cannabis cultivation
    * end prohibition
    * civil liberties
    * liberty
    * smoking

Current rating
5.0
Average score : 5.0
Based on : 1 vote
moderator_moj
Posted by moderator_moj July 15, 2010 at 15:02
Thanks for taking the time to post your idea. Your idea is similar to others on the website. To keep the discussion going in the one place, please add any further comments to one of the ideas below, which have a higher number of comments. http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]me-lines-as-the-netherlands http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]ecreational-and-medical-use We have closed this idea for comment and voting.

another closed idea

Legalise Cannabis

Info

by bzm542 on July 13, 2010 at 05:21PM

The dutch system would work fine in the UK apart from that there the cannabis is still supplyed illegally. This is why I sugest full legalisation as it would remove the criminal element and create a fully taxable market.

 

Note/

Cannabis is less harmfull than alcohol and tobacco (two bigest killers in the uk, bigger than ALL illegal drugs combined) with 0 deaths in all its hystory of use. It has no overdose limit.

Also the link betwenn cannabis and schizophrenia is non existant. As cannabis use has rapidly increased, the cases of schizophreniahave remain the same (3%-4% of the population).
Why the contribution is important

Regualting and taxing cannabis will:
- Save around £19 billion pounds in not enforcing this law

- create a new market, therfore creating new jobs (shops opening, grow operations..) and a new for of tax revenue

- Allow police to tackle real dangers to society, making comunities safer to live

- free up prison space (not letting sex offenders, murderers out early and cutting cost for prisons)

- Make it much harder for children to get hold of the drug... people caught selling to it can be fined etc..

- cannabis users will have consumer rights

- cannabis will undergo regulation procedures (not contaminated, fair scores etc..)

- Stop gifting organised crime a billion pound industry tax free.. Take controll of it

 

Prohibition causes more harm than it prevents.

Also the full use of hemp, and allowing people to grow it would save te planet. Hemp can produce a sutainable 'green' biofuel at very low costs, be used to make plastics, cloth, rope, clothes, cleaning products (soap, shampoo), seeds are the most nutriotional to man... please look into it :)

Is this idea inappropriate? Report this idea to a moderator
Current tags

    * cannabis
    * marijuana
    * cannabis legalisation
    * common sense
    * irrational law
    * unethical policy
    * government control
    * prejudice
    * injustice

Current rating
4.73333333333
Average score : 4.7
Based on : 15 votes
Rationalist
Posted by Rationalist July 13, 2010 at 18:26
Your Idea will be closed soon as the same rationality, reason and common sense has inundated this site since it's inception. Hundreds of us have suggested the same thing. Well done for posting the idea anyhow! The more the merrier. Make sure to vote on all similar ideas as well. Our voice MUST be heard!

Flag this comment as inappropriate
Raggy
Posted by Raggy July 13, 2010 at 19:15
I wonder how many comments we can get on this thread before it gets closed.

Flag this comment as inappropriate
Bengie
Posted by Bengie July 13, 2010 at 19:42
They shouldn't be able to close these threads - all free speech and what not. He's got an opinion shared by hundreds of thousands the government just needs to pull it's finger out and realise that we have a major deficit and i would much rather not have tax rises or job cuts. It is really this simple to make some massive money on cannabis.

Flag this comment as inappropriate
Rationalist
Posted by Rationalist July 13, 2010 at 21:10
^ EDIT: "He's got an opinion shared by hundreds of thousands" should be "He's got an opinion shared by MILLIONS".

Flag this comment as inappropriate
penrhos
Posted by penrhos July 13, 2010 at 22:21
In before the Moj lock...... Legalisation is the future - the people are SHOUTING!

Flag this comment as inappropriate
mphadland
Posted by mphadland July 14, 2010 at 11:04
counting down to close-down lol. where you at moj? . the fascists are getting slow.

Flag this comment as inappropriate
moderator_moj
Posted by moderator_moj July 14, 2010 at 12:27
Thanks for taking the time to post your idea. Your idea is similar to others on the website. To keep the discussion going in the one place, please add any further comments to one of the ideas below, which have a higher number of comments. http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]me-lines-as-the-netherlands http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]ecreational-and-medical-use We have closed this idea for comment and voting.

Flag this comment as inappropriate

discussion what discussion?

nice idea shame about the implementation

really nice post from a victim of this insanity,,,,,,,,

Without Discrimination

Info

by jonvon on July 02, 2010 at 04:17PM

Well phrased words above, but none the less use of cannabis is nothing but discrimination.

I am a 68 year old man and class myself as reasonably intelligent. I am severely disabled and suffer constant chronic pain 24/7 as does my wife, hence we are forced to take chemical "opoids" for our conditions, "Opoids - Opiates" derived from "Opium" act by attacking opoid receptors found in the brain and spinal cord and affect the brain in a way that it percieves pleasure resulting in "ephoria" or sense of well being - and like all medication abuse can lead to addiction.

I have tried Cannibis in the past, but do not use it despite its world wide recognition as a pain reliever including the UK, and I refer to G W PHARMAUCTICALS who manufacture medication from Cannabis and was once offered by them to partake in trails in earlier years, but also because it is illegal to use or grow due to the Law of growing by association, also due to the fear of what might be included in cannabis available from illegal dealers.

I fail to see why I cannot be allowed to grow my own cannabis plants for my medical problems without being assumed a criminal, after all the cerebal high assumed by its effects can not be anything as near as the supposed "euphoria" of "opoids" which makes me extremely drowsy and slow thinking.

It is high time that the law be changed on the outlook of cannabis use for chronic pain sufferers, and should be given the legal right to grow our own......but not for sale or distribution which in that instance should carry a severe fine.

Cohesion from coercion surely must and has to be the way forward as we are after all in the 21st Century, and has been used for centuries as a medicinal plant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2
Why the contribution is important

Control is vital I agree, but being allowed to grow plants for own medicinal use - a designated number agreed, naturally - would allow pain sufferers to come away from chemical "Opoids" if they choose hence saving the country the cost of prescription drugs, lower the cost to police as is current, also court costs and possible jail term cost where drug abuse is known to be rife.

I want to have the freedom, which should be my God given right, to do as I please in this case and grow my own cannabis plants for my and my wifes own medical use without being assumed a criminal in the eyes of the law, cannabis is after all a weed, a hemp, and nothing more which has medicinal propereties as do many such like plants throughout the world.

This is not about intelligence, but common sense and my human rights to do as I want.

Is this idea inappropriate? Report this idea to a moderator
Current tags

    * cannabis

Current rating
5.0
Average score : 5.0
Based on : 6 votes
Mr3rr0r
Posted by Mr3rr0r July 02, 2010 at 16:36
Educate, Medicate, Regulate

Flag this comment as inappropriate
moderator_moj
Posted by moderator_moj July 02, 2010 at 16:54
Thanks for taking the time to post your idea. This idea is similar to others on the website. To keep the discussion going and bring it into the one place, we're going to close this idea now and ask that any further comments be made on one of the ideas below, which already have a higher number of comments: http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/legalise-and-tax-cannabis The comments already posted here will not be lost or overlooked, and there's no need to post them again elsewhere.

The Cannabis Goldmine: How legalization affects quality of life for all.

Info

by ellismcorio on July 06, 2010 at 02:57PM

To improve the quality of life for all citizens of the United Kingdom by legalizing cannabis and having a dutch coffee shop style government regulated cannabis industry.
Why the contribution is important

The legalization of cannabis can dramatically improve the lives of everyone,from the young to the old and from all walks of life, the government seems to be making a lot of cuts in public services at the moment and if they would legalise cannabis not only would it remove a significant expenditure from the budget it would free up massive amounts of police and court time, reduce the prison population again saving the taxpayer money or freeing up alot of money from our budget, the legalisation of cannabis is not just a good thing for the cannabis smoking community it is good for every person in our country.

The cannabis industry could work miracles for our economy firstly it could create a massive number of much needed jobs and could create jobs in the following sectors.

    * Agriculture: large numbers of people could be employed to grow cannabis, production on an industrial scale creates demand for specialty seeds/grow labs/breeding centres,agricultural supplies and machinery and distribution
    * Retail: Large numbers of dutch style coffe shops could employ a large number of peoplein this area, and this in turn creates demand for construction or at least refurbishment of existing structure.
    * Medical: Cannabis is known for its medicinal proerties and new strains are being created all the time with better and stronger medicinal properties all the time, in Northern California U.S.A. alone there are thousands of medicinal cannabis dispensaries, in L.A. alone there are over 400 dispensaries which employ thousands of people.
    * Indurtrial: Cannabis has manyindustrial applications, it is one of the strongest natural fibres known to man it can be used to make many differnt products for the construction industry, it can be used to make clothing and can also be used to make lots of different cosmetic products.

Secondly it could cut government spending in several areas such as police,the courts, and the cost of maintaining the prison population which could free up large amounts of money which could make alot of the previously mentioned government spending cuts to public services not neccesary.

Thirdly, it could generate massive amounts of money for our economy, the taxation of the production and sale of cannabis could generate billions every year which could be spent on improving our schools and the nhs instead of making cuts which would improve the quality of life for everyone. It would also boost our tourism industry massively not only in terms of cannabis related tourism but it would boost numbers to what existing tourist attractions we already.

Fourthly, By having a government regulated cannabis industry it ensure the quality of the product and that it cannot be sold to minors. It also takes the money generated by the sales of cannabis away from organised criminals and into the hands of the people, our government.

And lastly it might encourage people that would normally consume alcohol to try cannabis,alot of people will not try cannabis purely because it is illegal, cannabis is a nutural enlightening spiritual meditative substance with no violence inducing qualities unlike alcohol, so much violence and destruction and suffering comes from people consuming alcohol, when was the last time you heard of a cannabis smoker regretting what they did the night before or apologising for their behaviour??

The legalisation of cannabis can save our economy,create jobs,improve our public services and reduce crime,maintaining the prohibition is costing every single taxpayer money and reducing the quality of life for every man,woman and child everywhere in our country.

Is this idea inappropriate? Report this idea to a moderator
Current tags

    * cannabis

Current rating
5.0
Average score : 5.0
Based on : 2 votes
moderator_moj
Posted by moderator_moj July 06, 2010 at 15:25
Thanks for taking the time to post your idea. Your idea is similar to one we have already received. To keep the discussion going in the one place, please add your comments to the original idea at: • http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/legalise-and-tax-cannabis

Found a good piece of history here titled: Legalisation: The First Hundred Years.
What happened when drugs were legal and why they were prohibited.

Interesting and informative.

LOL...sorry forgot the link. Legalisation: The First Hundred Years
What happened when drugs were legal and why they were prohibited
 http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/jay.legalisation.html

 Posted by james_201 July 13, 2010 at 01:37
It would appear that the likes of Clegg are only prepared to listen to the public on certain issues. The Freedom that Labour took away and replaced with its very unpopular Nanny State, no smoking everywhere clearly are attempts at control and to dictate lifestyle choices, to adults. In a democracy there would be a further debate on this issue. Clearly the likes of Clegg don't intend to give people back their freedom at all. Even the moderators are trying to water down the arguments for repealing the ban by shutting down threads. What a complete and utter sham, this Your Freedom Website is.

Hurrah - someone quoted my thread.... I smell a conspiracy, I remember the poll tax riots, thats what governments get if the don't listen to the public. With 40% cuts coming - lets see how long this one can afford to ignore the 10% of the population that use cannabis.

I remember the riots of the early 80's....and the climate was much like it is now, over the top policing, a government with no compassion, rising unemployment. Part of me hopes it doesn't happen again, but if the people aren't listened to and kicked every which way what else is left to them? The only difference I see now is that more people use cannabis. Can you have a chilled out riot?

This is the point we all fear, we have history and sociology to back the point up, there is a real tangible air to this all, we could be headed for a real implosion, and we've all picked up this independently, so I would give credence to the notion. The drugs market, as it stands in the black market, is making some very powerful people out there. The UK often rests on its laurels, assuming we're above all of the troubles that are and have effected Europe and you can even cite South America and Asia. The drug war is fuelling unrest at every level of society, this is why there is an outcry, too many people are spotting where we headed. Cannabis is the first and biggest step in cleaning things up and restoring a natural order. The argument against legitimisation always boil down to "you just want to get high"- no, we want to stop the inevitable destruction of this country, we're the last bastion of the cannabis war, we're laughing stocks, please sort this out, it is TRULY needed!

it can actually help people with mental and emotional problems, especially PTSD, it can help cancer patients cope with the medication that makes them more ill than the cancer....

It would not only give back many people their human rights but it could generate money to go towards paying off the debt, cut down on the expenses of imprisoning people for their choice of medicine/dealing with life, generate legal jobs that is good for the economy, growing cannabis is actually good for the soil. For this reason it was once a legal requirement in USA to crop rotate hemp/cannabis before its demonisation in the early part of the 1900's. The products made from hemp (textiles, paper, artists canvas (so called because it was made from the cannabis plant), oil, fuel, plastics, medicines, etc which are eco friendly. We could have soil being nourished organically, production of paper causing far less pollution and uses less harmful chemicals than using trees. There are many ecological, humanitarian and financial benefits to legalising cannabis. It seems more a crime to keep it illeagal.

We have survived for centuries living side by side cannabis, 5000+ years hand in hand and the world didnt end, we didnt all turn into lazy lay abouts.

The world progressed..

Isn't it about time Cannabis Laws became extinct?

Most people against cannabis seem to make there minds up before they know the whole facts about this ancient herb.
I would like people to take a moment to read this article from the cell press medical journal.

http://leavesofgrass.info/[…]/Non-Psychoactive-Cannabinoids.pdf

If this article were to be printed in the main stream press, the majority of households who buy them would have the chance to read unbiased proven facts about a plant that has been here for thousands of years, without being simply misled into believing that cannabis is the evil weed, we as individuals should be allowed the freedom to choose our own medications.

Yep, couldn't agree with you more homegrownoutlaw. We seem to be heading to a darker place as a nation. I thought it was just me but obviously not.

Allow people to grow a couple of plants at home and watch the crime rates plummet, average age of hard drug users increase
and lower violent crimes. Successive government advisors have
stated that Cannabis is NOT in the same league as some legal
drugs when it comes to the damage caused to society as well as
the cost to the economy and the health of the user (alcohol anyone ?) In fact, if the government were so concerned about
the effects on society caused by the misuse of drugs the it is
totally hypocritical of them not to immediately reclassify alcohol as a class A drug.

Decriminalisation ISN'T ENOUGH! Quite simply one of the main points of legalising cannabis is to take it out of the hands of organised crime. Decriminalisation doesn't do this, and many aspects of the drug trade in the Netherlands are STILL controlled by organised crime.

Leaglisation is the way forward, not some half-measure that will cut out many of the benefits assocaited with proper legalisation.

the lib dem policy is in favor of decriminalizing cannabis and David Cameron has always been in favor of legalizing cannabis. Now the question is: will they be able to convince their old ignorant corrupted colleagues? i honestly doubt it.

The_Cuckoo July 16, 2010 at 14:54
Decriminalisation ISN'T ENOUGH! Quite simply one of the main points of legalising cannabis is to take it out of the hands of organised crime. Decriminalisation doesn't do this, and many aspects of the drug trade in the Netherlands are STILL controlled by organised crime.

definintly agree with you cuckoo.nothing left to say

No for decriminalizing cannabis YES for legalizing it.

So many points made above strike a chord with me, and I suppose for this 'comment' to be worth anything I shall have to reiterate at least some of them.

- simple economics; we have a lot of money to find, which legalised cannabis can help through increased tax revenue and decreased expenditure on wasted police time (not to mention freeing up police for targeting genuine problems).

- my body is just that, my body, and as long as my cannabis use has no adverse effects on others, it really isn't any business of the government.

- it would be jolly nice to be able to buy cannabis of known strength, instead of risking ending up with something that blows your mind when you thought you were going to be in for a relaxing evening!

- alcohol has far more negative societal effects than cannabis: as someone once asked, would you rather be walking down an alleyway at midnight and encounter a group of people leaving a pub looking for a fight, or a group of people who've just smoked a spliff looking for some biscuits?

- I genuinely don't believe that legalising cannabis would lead to more people using it; if anything by removing the lure of its illegality, young people would be less likely to find it so attractive. Such a huge number of people use it now that to make a criminal of each one is absurd.

Oh and I could continue... But I'll leave it at that and hope hope hope that Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg can make their government see sense.

Full Legalisation please - NOT Decriminalisation!

It is a disgrace that we still have these outdated laws which basically dictate that you can take the state sponsored drugs (alcohol, tobacco) but not drugs like cannabis, cocaine or ecstasy.

Is this 2010 in the UK or the Garden of Eden? "You can eat the orange and pear, but.... err.... do not touch the apple"!!!!!!

Please all vote for the ‘Repeal Drug Prohibition’ tag!

DO NOT LEGALISE CANNABIS

I doubt the government would take cannabis straight from an illegal Class B substance to being fully legal, but decriminalising at least would be a great start and would cause much less of an uproar amongst the right wing media.
If the current government will listen to the results and recommendations of independent, impartial scientific studies then they will be taken more seriously by the general public. Choosing drug classifications arbitrarily does no good for will do no good for the government's credibility.
When the Misuse of Drugs Act was implemented, it was stated the classification of individual drugs could change with further scientific research. But, even with modern research showing it to be much less harmful than originally thought (and in many cases beneficial) cannabis is still class B which goes against the very foundation of the act - in effect this is a misuse of the Misuse of Drugs Act.

Here is a letter I wrote to the PM, maybe it will convince some people :) :

I think there is something very wrong with current government policies if a respected expert such as David Nutt is ignored and subsequently fired because he gives a conclusion that is not in line with party policies.

It is common knowledge that there is a great number of regular cannabis smokers in the UK:
 "Cannabis was the drug most likely to be used, remaining consistent with previous years. The 2008/09 BCS estimates that 7.9 per cent of 16 to 59 year olds used cannabis in the last year, representing around 79 per cent (...) of last year illicit drug users (Figure 2.2 and Table 2.2)" (1 - see link to government site at the end of this comment)

I think a few irrefutable conclusions can be drawn from this, mainly:

1.Prohibition is not working.

2. If cannabis were legalized and taxed it would create significant revenue.

A classic complaint is that cannabis is a “Gateway drug”, and while I feel it is no more so than alcohol or cigarettes there is some merit in the argument and the reason I think it can be seen as a gateway drug is that it is often being sold by unscrupulous dealers who want to push harder drugs, if cannabis was legal this would not be an issue, it would also mean less money in black markets and put buyers in a less precarious situation where they don’t know for certain if what they’re buying is safe or being mixed with other substances.

Having a legalized status would also make cannabis users feel less ostracized by politicians and law enforcement, making them less likely to fall in with the wrong crowd and adopting anti-social and sometimes criminal attitudes, and less likely to be recruited by the less savory elements that profit from contraband sales.

Another complaint I have noticed in the media and with certain politicians is that the THC content of cannabis being sold on the street is on the rise and higher than ever, if cannabis was legalized this could easily regulated.

An issue of prohibition is the cost of policing cannabis, it is expensive, a waste of police resources and ultimately I do not know what threat cannabis users pose to the public, as you most likely are aware there is a great number of highly regarded people from all walks of life that have admitted to having smoked cannabis in the past, would it be beneficial to society for these people to have a criminal record and possibly be in jail?

As well as the revenue it would bring, there are also other financial benefits, such as the creation of new business and therefore new jobs.

Finally, a very important aspect of cannabis which is sometimes overlooked is its medical value of cannabis, on which much research has been done recently due to medical cannabis being legalized in parts of America and Canada, it is shown to help with serious illnesses such as alzheimer's disease, lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, breast cancer, HIV/AIDS, brain cancer, depression, MS and treating opioid dependence, it also has proven more effective and causing fewer side effects than some currently prescribed treatments.

There is a lot of false information regarding cannabis because of biased research reports and general propaganda from past generations; I think an unbiased inquiry would benefit many people.

1 http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/hosb1209.pdf

allowing money hungry criminals to control and sell drugs to children under a prohibition model will justify prohibition ,i mean if it was regulated criminals wouldn't want anything to do with it, removing the gateway to harder or polluted drugs theory and age limits would make it hard for children to get hold of and it would allow folk to treat there ailment in a non-toxic way and those who dodge the dealers and real criminals by growing their own wont be labeled criminals filling our courts and jails and all those that get tar'd with the druggy brush would most probably get work in the "regulated industry" and the police will be freed up to tackle victim producing crimes and all those who have had their future taken from them by the current system for possession will be free again and scientist could do real open research into improving our knowledge and understanding even in the search for life giving cures and the tax for good things like safer streets , education and skate parks and things for teenagers or paying off our united debt ,i mean you wouldn't want that , you wouldn't want the tax paying public to know regulation does a better job at doing what prohibition sets out to do because it's not tradition, ballshARk ,,, i mean prohibition ! LOL ,,best to get stuck in the rut of political paradoxes to justify prohibition and all the corruption that goes with it .bring back witches!

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watc[…]e=player_embedded"> ~CLICK HERE WATCH THIS ~ </a>

i hope something is gonna be done to stop the war on drugs.

make poverty history! cheaper drugs now!

I dont drink alcohol so i pay no tax in that area of life.

it is offensive and unjust that people can drink and smoke tobbacco but no one can enjoy the calming focusing effects of cannabis. I can go smoke any plant in my garden legally and i bet some of them are REALLY dangerous too!

Regualetd, taxed and lawful is the way forward

release natures bandage.

p.s cant wait to buy a car made from hemp fibre!

I too beleive cannabis should be decriminilized/leagalized and taxed. I would far rather be around a bunch of stoned people than a bunch of drunk people. Cannabis does not make people violent you cannot overdose on it and it would prevent a lot of people overdooing the alcohol.
Plus if taxed it could bring in a lot of money which this now drug dealers are raking in and it helps to fund crime.
Surely the government understands prohibition just forces things underground where the black market can make its millions and there would be more space in prison instead of petty drug "criminals" being locked up using our precious tax money.

Please legalize cannabis and end this nonsense war. People should be trusted and not pushed to live in a false fear of the government. Whats wrong with cannabis? not much, in fact it would make the Uk a better pace to live in if it were controlled and regulated. Do you think this also government people? We are not stupid so do not treat us as so.

Do what is right and do it now!

its time to get serious government. End this war because you have lost this war.

cannabis is enjoyed by millions and used responsibly.

Government, take a look around, you have lost the war.

Cannabis is everywhere.

Regulate, tax, control. Allow us to grow, mine organic by choice.

makeing it illegal is stupid and futile.

Prohabition is Murder

Alchohole makes millions of people sick every day

I find it hard to add to the cohesive set of arguments posted here. I am worried, however, about what the Government plan to do with the social data contained on this website.

I've set up a Facebook group (that's all I could think of, sorry!) called Make http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/ effective, transparent and accountable. If you want to create pressure on the Government to listen what intelligent, articulate voters think and act upon it, please join. http://www.facebook.com/[…]/group.php?gid=127035624006388

opening up cannabis 'along the same lines' as the Netherlands is not the best way to approach the subject. As is, Holland and the Netherlands are seeking to get rid of many of the coffee shops and brothels. The Netherlands has a policy of tolerance not legality.

What we should be pushing for is legality with rights otherwise the next incoming government will simply rescind any policy made at this point, whilst pointing at some tenuous research/statistics that backup their view that Cannabis is bad.

We should be pushing to have Cannabis use and production enabled in a similar fashion to alcohol; where distribution and production is regulated and inspected, potency levels tested and clearly presented allowing users to choose their preferred strength.

Although Holland's approach to legalisation is appealing it is simply brushing the issue under the carpet until a particularly fundamental government decides to outlaw it again.

"We're losing the war on drugs" -- George Bush Senior

"Do you know what that implies?, There's a war being fought and people on drugs are winning!!" -- Bill Hicks

"Another complaint I have noticed in the media and with certain politicians is that the THC content of cannabis being sold on the street is on the rise and higher than ever, if cannabis was legalized this could easily regulated."

And yet, when I worked in an off license we sold 'polish Pure Spirit' which was 70%, 70%! one shot had to be mixed roughly with one pint of water to avoid death or serious illness at the very least. Go Figure!!

Typically, brands of alcohol purporting to be of higher alcohol content, are for all purposes revered in this country. Sounds like a double standard to me.

[quote]Posted by commonsenseapproach July 16, 2010 at 22:39
DO NOT LEGALISE CANNABIS[/quote]

Any particular reason why, perhaps something you read in the DailyMail ?

I note that the only two suggested threads for commenting on the Cannabis issue is:

1. Medicinal Use
2. Decriminalisation

can we start a "Fully Legalised" thread so as to cover the actual approached being suggested instead of the ones the moderators have been told to allow.

[quote]Posted by NicD July 01, 2010 at 07:58
decriminalise it BUT tax it heavily as it can cause mental problems reduce the will to work[/quote]

According to who ?

@youlikeicecream - you need this thread

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/legalise-and-tax-cannabis

or this one

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/[…]/repeal-drugs-prohibition

I agree full legalisation is the answer but decriminalisation for personal use would be a start.

OK, So if the model for Descriminalisation in the Netherlands is problematic, how about the approach taken in Portugal?

A report commissioned by the Cato Institute to study the impact of decriminalization in Portugal states:

"Notably, decriminalization has become increasingly
popular in Portugal since 2001. Except for
some far-right politicians, very few domestic political
factions are agitating for a repeal of the 2001 law.
And while there is a widespread perception that
bureaucratic changes need to be made to Portugal’s
decriminalization framework to make it more efficient
and effective, there is no real debate about
whether drugs should once again be criminalized"

and later..

"The data show that, judged by virtually every
metric, the Portuguese decriminalization framework
has been a resounding success. Within this
success lie self-evident lessons that should guide
drug policy debates around the world."

Full report here...

http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/greenwald_whitepaper.pdf

Don't ignore this, Clegg - I and many others voted for the Dems partly because of the Liberal Democrat Drug Policy which sees decriminalisation and eventually full, legal regulation as the correct solution to cannabis use.

You must at least acknowledge that this is one of the most popular requests, and tell us why - with proper expert advise to back you up - it could not be done.

i totally agree and i have smoked it for 15 years and got to work at 4am everyday ive been off work for 4 days this year thats all, but a guy who drinks a lot has been off for 3 months in total, you do the maths.

I Think also that we need to change this site to full legalization of cannabis. All of these points can be added to that thread.

We would also like a personal comment from Nick and also David asa to when they will act on this as its the biggest issue on this website.

Legalize Cannabis

If the only option is decriminalisation then I think portugal's model is superior to Holland's.

I think middle-England would have serious issues with coffeeshops popping up everywhere and "Stoned" people being out on the streets (The Daily Fail would have kittens and would be harping on about the destruction of society) It would be much easier to have "cannabis dispensaries" or to be left alone to grow our own.

The key issue is we must get "Possession for personal use" defined correctly so users are easily identifiable from criminal dealers (That should be easy for example it could be < 10g soft drugs, < 2g hard drugs in a public place/car & no bundles of cash, scales or baggies), also social supply should not be a crime (you can be currently charged for supplying if you pass your joint to a friend sat next to you or if you pass them your cannabis to roll a joint for you).

Then there's the personal growing issue, Maybe an annual license from the government that you pay for to cover the administration fees that also allows the local police to inspect your premisis to ensure you are sticking to your license condition (this would prevent your door going in for being mistaken for an illegal commercial grow) - This would mean the local police would have to know your address and thet you were growing and some people would be uncomfortable with the civil liberties angle - but if you want to grow legally you have to play by the rules.

There could be a maximum plant limit say 5 adult plants and up to 10 seedlings/cuttings (so you can have a constant supply with crop rotation).

As it is only decriminalisation "Dealing" & "Trafficing" would still be a crime, it wouldn't prevent some of the issues prohibition causes (no regulation, violence, drug gangs) but for the majority of cannabis users it would remove them from possible contact with the criminal justice system and all the costs to society that causes.

Just seen this posted on another forum, a report from the Chairman of the Bar Council of the United Kingdom and Wales, Nicholas Green QC has called for the end of prohibition, second and third paragraph down:

http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/[…]/detail.php?id=179

how about we dont pay any tax on anything grown for yourself! we all seem to agree on taxes on cannabis and taxes on growing but lets be fair, this is our olive branch to the gov. "year we will pay taxes on it, just leave us be" and i agree that each side getting something is a fair trade but in an ideal world the only tax to be made would be vat on commercial sales, not for a pot, some soil and a seed.

We realise, you (the government) don't want to go back on your word (many years ago) like the USA. You may now feel as if you agree with many of the people that are posting here.

We forgive you, now please! Prohibition of this plant just doesn't make sense!

At last! They've decriminalised The Netherlands!

Cannabis is in widespread use, and always will be. No amount of prohibition will change that.

So, the question the government should be asking is this:

Who should control the distribution network, set standards for purity, etc?

1. Criminal gangs

2. Government

The choice really is as simple as that.

thanks Penrhos, the Threads for Cannabis are in a bit of mess.

The evidence is out there. Rick Simpson, Dr. Melamede, Dr. Manuel Guzman
If you have never heard of these people you should Google them.
Wise up people! Pure THC Oil shrinks Cancer Tumours!

I have been to Amsterdam and it makes complete sense to legalize it, it is the Daily mail look on cannabis that we have here, we need to Look at cannabis with HOPE and NOT FEAR... dont be scared of cannabis you can use it for many things, Hemp can be used instead of paper much more eco friendly.. I smoke because it leaves me relaxed and happy (ohh i forgot that is a really bad quality in a drug) it makes me laugh.. and this is illegal why???????? Cannabis legalization makes sense

I want to know why the media keep so quiet about all the plus sides of cannabis?

The news keep saying the BS can involve locals buying out their local pub!!!! can i get together with locals and setup a cannabis members club? a big cannabis society

We don't want to decriminalise like the Netherlands, All we need to do is extend the terms of the existing Hemp growing legislation to include plants grown at home for personal use. Simples! admin through the post office, £50 a year for a Ganga growers permit. Where's the drama in that?
Exept that the money would come straight back to the Treasury instead of being laundered into the Banks. Now who could that be a problem for?

i would not want to see a pay-per-grow law BUT as a token of appreciation i would be happy to pay for a grow in order to give back the good will the gov will hopefully give to us

Like everybody else on here and millions of others, I ignore this law. There is no point to a law that cannot be enforced and furthermore is against the wishes of a large number of the population.

Cannabis shouldn't be decriminalised, it should be legalised. Otherwise I agree. As a civil liberties issue, this is almost as important as amending the smoking ban.

the bbc went out with the rebels in afghanistan. the report said they had been offered money by the americans (ive not varified this myself) and that they have no concern with this money.

well no they dont, not with fields of poppies and indica plants - they have a hand in a $354bill industry!!!!

it cuts off more then then street dealer....

We need more comments on this idea to push it up above other issues when people look for ideas via most comments!

get your social network site friends here, msn friends, mail bomb your email pals.

keep the topic going.

ipsire further ideas like setting up a charity to help grow medical grade cannabis for people who wouldnt have the space or knowledge to grow for themselves. id love to run such a scheme

I also thikn cannabis should not be illegal, I am the type of person who tries to avoid using drugs, including caffine alcohol cannabis and nicotine. I deffinately don't think that anything horrendousely bad would happen if it was legalised or decriminalised (which are different things). I think it is reasonable to make driving while on drugs or drunk is sensible, but calm sensible people who use this drug as a way to relax in their own homes are not the people who should be persecuted, fined, sent to prison and treated as wrong doers in our society! I do believe that this is an unhelpful barrier to civil liberties. If this drug was legal then effective regulations could be put in place. For example, there could be an age limit set, there is some science to suggest that cannabis can have adverse effects on the developement of children at certain stages (though it really isnt as bad as some people would have you think), children could be educated more about how to keep themselves safe. cannabis could be regulated, the strength and how it is produced, safely etc. etc. etc.

My parents did their bet to this to me when i was growing up. Useful information such as this, helped me to make an informed decision to avoid using harmful drugs, including coffee and legal drugs. My mum used cannabis, particularly when she was stressed and in pain due to illness, I don't mind telling you this as she is now dead and cannot be prosecuted, but would it not be better is people could discuss drugs openly like this?

Also, i have been told that cannabis has claimed one life in the UK, it was someone in my local town however and i find it hard to believe that this is 100% true (some people saying canabis has never killed anyone, just adding info)

I am in favour of this idea, however i am saddened by the way the moderators are choosing the posts to be kept and those to be removed/locked. The public should be deciding the way the ideas are screened, and the ideas on this topic which have been chosen to stay are not the best put, or the ones with the best information, or the ones that present the idea best at all.

this sort of thing needs to stop
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10472510

I would give my full "two penneth" this argument but what's the point? we are like a bunch of parrots! we all know the truth, we all know what needs to be done and the only people who disagree with us do so with bizarre arguments like "cannabis makes you a rapist" or some crap like that. FULLY LEGALIZE IT AND DO IT QUICK! people have lost faith in politics... wonder why? the government need to realize that the people who smoke cannabis are often highly productive members of society like me. (they get about £500 out of my wages each month) Stop criminalizing productive, reasonable human beings because of all the historical BULLSHIT that has been spouted in the past!

Oh and to any "nay sayers" reading this. I challenge you to construct an intelligent, coherent argument for the prohibition of Cannabis based on facts (real ones). Come on prove us wrong! lets see who the intelligent human beings are! i seriously doubt any of you can, although an intelligent debate would be a welcome change.

THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT MR CLEGG! WILL YOU DO RIGHT BY THE BRITISH PUBLIC OR WILL YOU DRIVE AN EVEN BIGGER WEDGE BETWEEN AVERAGE BRITTONS AND POLITICIANS?

There is a post here on the first page that asks for a personal comment by either Nick or David on this issue. The cannabis issue is one of the largest on this site and it can no longer be avoided.

LEGALIZE CANNABIS BEFORE 2011

LEGALIZE CANNABIS BEFORE 2011

This just in:

http://www.politics.co.uk/n[…]-war-on-drugs-$21381761.htm

Advocates of drug law reform had reason to celebrate today after public statements by senior figures in the medical and legal community suggested the argument was turning in their favour.
The chair of the Bar Council argued in his most recent report that decriminalising drug use would have substantial public benefits, while the editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), the UK's most well-respected medical publication, came out publicly in support of drug law reform.
The twin developments come at an exciting time for those calling for a more liberal drug policy. Both deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and prime minister David Cameron are on record questioning the effectiveness of Britain's drug laws. Activists hope reform might be in the pipeline.
In his most recent report the chair of the Bar Council, Nicholas Green QC, argued that decriminalising drugs did not lead to greater use and would have the effect of cutting crime.
"A growing body of comparative evidence suggests that decriminalising personal use can have positive consequences; it can free up huge amounts of police resources, reduce crime and recidivism and improve public health," he said.
"All this can be achieved without any overall increase in drug usage. If this is so, then it would be rational to follow suit. And this will save money and mean that there is less pressure on the justice system.
"A rational approach is not usually the response of large parts of the media when it comes to issues relating to criminal justice," he continued.
"This is something the Bar Council can address. We are apolitical; we act for the prosecution and the defence and most of the judiciary are former members. We can speak out in favour of an approach which urges policies which work and not those which simply play to the gallery."
The comments came at the same time as a special edition of the BMJ in which the editor, Fiona Godlee, endorses an article by Steve Rolles of Transform, a group which lobbies for reform of the UK's drugs laws.
"In a beautifully argued essay Stephen Rolles calls on us to envisage an alternative to the hopelessly failed war on drugs," she writes.
"He says, and I agree, that we must regulate drug use, not criminalise it."
Danny Kushlick, head of external affairs at Transform, said: "The war on drugs is in deep crisis. These comments show that support for drug policy reform is becoming more and more mainstream, and fundamental change is now inevitable.
"With a prime minster and deputy prime minister both longstanding supporters of alternatives to the war on drugs, at the very least the government must initiate an impact assessment comparing prohibition with decriminalisation and strict legal regulation."
In 2007, Mr Clegg - then Lib Dem home affairs spokesman - said the "so-called war on drugs is failing" following a critical RSA report into drug prohibition.
David Cameron voted in favour of recommendation 24 in the home affairs committee's inquiry into drug misuse in 2002, which read: "We recommend that the government initiates a discussion within the Commission on Narcotic Drugs of alternative ways-including the possibility of legalisation and regulation-to tackle the global drugs dilemma."
Activists may be disappointed if they expect a sea-change in policy on the back of the coalition government's legislative agenda, however.
While Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron have previously expressed a sympathetic view of the arguments calling for drug law reform, neither will be keen to trigger the media attack which would result from a move to liberalise drug laws.
Recent comments from home secretary Theresa May to the home affairs committee suggest the government is moving in precisely the opposite direction, and is ready to pass legislation allowing for temporary bans to be imposed on legal highs while the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) establishes their legal status.

Decriminilisation in the Netherlands still has its flaws. For example, coffeeshops can only get their weed to sell from growers which is illegal and that a coffeeshop can only possess 500 g of weed at a time. Full legalisation and taxation of cannabis is needed. California state in November are voting for this measure, if successful I feel this will catalyse the end of the failed prohibition of cannabis.

 Posted by moderator July 19, 2010 at 22:19
This an appropriate subject for Mr. Clegg + P.M. Cameron to comment on. The hard facts are that the 'war' on drugs has failed miserably, while at the same time giving power and wealth to corrupt individuals. It time to re-examine the situation and dare I say it time for a change.

Legalize, tax + regulate.

FROM POST ON FIRST PAGE ASKING NICK CLEGG FOR A PERSONAL COMMENT

OF COURSE IT IS AND WE EXPECT A COMMENT NOW!

LEGALIZE CANNABIS IN THE UK

"Just because we have a widespread problem is no reason to decriminalise it. If paedophilia became rampant, would we suggest the same? Or theft? Decriminalising self harm and harm to others is non sensical."

Don't be silly. If I smoke cannabis or drink alcohol in my house on my own, who am I harming exactly? If I'm harming anyone I'm harming myself.

The non-sensicle idea is criminalising people (i.e.- giving them a criminal record) for doing an activity that is safer than many activities which are legal, like drinking alcohol for example or going sky diving.

If someone has sex with a child then they cause a huge amount of harm to that child. It's ridiculous to make a comparison between that and people using drugs.

We do want mr Clegg to comment about cannabis and drugs legalization.

Prohibition on Cannabis - went something like this - originally brought into place due to Paper - The production of paper - American Business man cutting down trees making paper making alot of money - Amercian farmer growing cannabis - making paper out of his crop - Trees big grow very slowly the planet needs them - cannabis yeilds a crop every 3 months - therefore more sustainable income from paper - so what does the big fat amercian business man do - yep thats right he sets into place the prohibition of cannabie - so instead of using the good green herb that god and mother nature gave us which is good for our eco system - the americans in there infinite wisdow decide to cut down all the trees, and destroy the planet - because they are to stupid to actually understand that the planet needs to breath - Cannabis is not just a plant that produces THC to smoke - it also is used to make soap, beauty products, clothing, paper, it is a herb - it has medicinal purposes - growing and producing cannabis crops is good for our planet - a sustainable income - I'll put it another way --- Queen Victoria smoked Opium - produced from poppies as we know - which anyone can grow in their back garden - legally - we even wear the poppy on our lapels to honour the service men - now Haile Selassie would be turning in his grave - Emperor of Ethiopia from 1930 to 1974. The heir to a dynasty that traced its origins to the 13th century, and from there by tradition back to King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, why then oh why do we not heed there advice - cannabis is a way of life - it is needed for the continued growth of our human race - how can you deny the ancestral heritage of such a substance - how can we say our ancestors where wrong with cannabis we can not and we should not just remember that this prohibition started because of the greed of an American business man - who had no right to tell the rest of the world how they should or should not live. So can we please bring this wonderful herb back from the stupidity of American business men - we are killing our planet using trees when we could just use hemp --- I beg you to not spend money on trident I beg you to end this stupidity on cannabis prohibition - I beg you - to use your intelligence and stop this ignorance and from preventing me to have freedom to live my life in peace and tranquility - I can say that if it were not for cannabis I would be dead - after being raped the only thing that could help me sleep was cannabis - so I beg you - to stop being such bigots about this particular natural god given plant - just to add more points - I have been robbed and beaten up by persons on alcohol - I have had property broken into and cars smashed up by persons on alcohol I have been beaten up in the street while at a cash point machine by persons on alcohol - NEVER NOT EVER HAVE I EVER BEEN HARMED BY A PERSON ON CANNABIS NEVER - David Cameron smoked when at Uni - so stop telling the rest of us we are criminals -

Potential tax revenues from the legal production, sale and consumption of cannabis measure in the tens of billions, perhaps even hundreds if you consider the whole supply chain. In addition, it'll lead to the direct and indirect creation of tens of thousands of jobs - from agriculture to retail, and every echelon of business in between.

The links between cannabis use and mental illness are becoming clearer, and it seems very early adopters (teenagers) are the highest at risk group. Legalise it and slap a minimum age of 21 on it's sale, and whilst yes, just like alcohol it'll still get into the hands of a few under age users, at least we would be rid of the dealers who'll shamelessly sell it by the handful to 13 year olds.

The single biggest stumbling block is how to make sure people don't smoke and drive, you can't breathalyse for it, so perhaps a way around this is to allow police to request a sample of hair or blood either on site or at the station for retrospective points award and fines - but only where the officer has provable due cause for concern, i.e. erratic driving and/or visual symptoms of consumption/overuse.

So the benefits are: Increased employment, increased tax revenues, better child protection, better medical understanding, lower crime rates, more police time, safer roads and a freer society. The downsides are potential increases in mental health issues, potentially higher rates of associated diseases (from consumption with tobacco), more exposure to drugs tourism and attendant social order issues and a potential attitude shift towards consumption of other drugs. But at least you'd have more money for more medical facilities and more police around to deal with any problems!

in a few more years if we continue this way the drug gangs in the UK will absolutely SMASH the police.

LEGALIZE CANNABIS NOW AND FOLLOWED BY ALL DRUGS.

regulate, control (a term most police officers do not know)

TAX

SIMPLE

Mr Clegg, we are waiting.......

You know this is a major issue.

I want my children to grow up knowing the truth about drugs thank you very much. This is for their own safety and any loving father would.

You are insane if you think you are winning this stupid war on Cannabis.

LEGALIZE CANNABIS BEFORE 2011

Not one solid argument out of thousands on this site for keeping things the way they are.

Please legalize cannabis.

LEGALIZE CANNABIS FOR 2011. Who gives a shit what the Sun or the daily Torygraph think! Clegg and Cameron need stick 2 fingers up to the media backlash.

ive never been able to understand why they play to the media in next to everything they do. they pushed methadrone and the gov followed like sheep.

spineless?

LEGALIZE CANNABIS BEFORE 2011

The fact of the matter is the law doesn't work. Kids can get hold of cannabis easy as anything. I'm an adult, smoked it since I was 15 I its much harder for me to get hold of it now as an adult that it ever was before. My girlfriend didn't believe me when I told her its in every school. She asked her kids and sure enought they all knew people in shool who could get hold of it.

Without regulation there is no agelimit, drug dealers don't care who they sell it to, and they're also pushing harder drugs on their customers, so I would support an approach similar to the netherlands, where you have hard drugs and soft drugs, get rid of all other classes.

The only thing that would need to be looked at carefully during legalisation is that the criminal underworld doesn't seize control of the market since they already have grow houses etc.

@ gr8mohawk

Like the people who gave us disposable nappies...they used to be bootleggers before they went legit. A lot of these people will move into legit businesses, especially those with money, if they don't and they go legit selling weed I don't see where the problem is. A lot of the people running the dispensaries in the US are ex dealers, a lot of the money for them has come from illegal drug deals, but they are legit now, growing selling weed and paying taxes and in places like Oakland California are doing bloody well.
We should look at Oakland for inspiration, they've developed a very mature and responsible cannabis industry. They have a University called Oaksterdam that teaches medicinal users how to grow properly and responsibly. That is how envisage the UK being if it's done right.

There will always be those who carry on breaking the law, but they would do it anyway even if drugs weren't around to be exploited. Regulation is a brave step but we are quickly reaching the point of no return, if we don't change roads now the gangs are going to get more powerful and start causing really serious problems.

Let us start by decriminalising possession and allowing a small number of plants to cultivated for personal use. Increase the treatment options and services with the money saved and wait.....let's see what happens over a couple of years and resist all attempts by the far right to change things. If we work towards getting treatment for those who need it and allowing the rest to live like adults and choose for themselves we too can have a climate like Portugal too.

It should also be obvious from the many, many different submissions asking for essentially the same thing in many different ways that this outcry is not the result of an organised campaign, but of many pockets of individual people having their say.

more ways to contact nick clegg
http://card.ly/nickclegg

LEGALIZE CANNABIS BEFORE 2011

Mr Clegg, we want an answer. An answer from you, explaining clearly and concisely why you are rejecting each and every one of the arguments made on this website. I'm sure there are plenty of people willing to reduce the hundreds of comments on this thread into an easily digestible series of points for you to refute, so it's not even a case of wading through the quagmire.

The cannabis issue is one of the largest on this site. You have asked for our view Mr Clegg, now please be a man and face the music. Tell the puplic the truth and let them know that all past governments have lied to them. Are you a man or a...? We are waiting

Legalize Cannabis before 2011

We will never respect the cannabis prohabition. It will never work.

You gave us a chance to express our views and this, being one of the most popular on the website, is clearly important to the British public. PLEASE do not laugh it off like Obama did, it's disrespectful and undermines democracy. Come on Clegg.... be our voice!

I'm not picking on Jason here in particular, but he absolutely summarizes for me what the pro-cannnabis legalisation people don't get, so I'm going to deal with what he says bit by bit.

*******************************************

YOU WROTE
 
Posted by jasonw1uk July 01, 2010 at 20:0

I am 25 i'm have a sucessful career in IT and smoke cannabis on a daily basis, i consider myself a useful member of society i pay my taxes,

MY REPLY

Yes, you think what you are doing is alright, because you've got a "good job" - i.e. a respected professional career that pays a good salary, so society lables you a "success."

Actually, there's no evidence that anything you've said means you're a useful member of society at all, except you are a self-confessed cog in the system, who does his bit and keeps that society as it is going, the status quo.

You're the most dangerous kind of pro-cannabis person, because you're the one posing as the "respectable citizen", and if there were enough like you - and it's slowly getting there - I dn't doubt sooner or later it would be legalised, which neither you or the rest here can see would be disastrous for all concerned.

What you don't see, is this society is very deeply flawed, and for the same reasons you don't see WHY you are habitual a cannabis user.

The reason is, Jason, because there's a hell of a lot more to being a sucessful HUMAN BEING (not just doing a well piad job that society calls "sucess") than that.

We are moral beings, and the very reason we're having such a big argument here, is BECAUSE of that fact.

There are FOR EXAMPLE (one of thousands I could give) the STARVING MILLIONS and on the whole, people like yourself are not doing one iota about it, you might put the occasional shilling in an Oxfam tin, but you're not addressing the big issues in society, and I can bet you a penny to a pound, you're not addressing your relationships issues.

The basic problem of every man, is HE CAN'T GET HIS RELATIONSHIPS RIGHT WITH HIS WOMAN, and increasingly thanks to feminist intervention in the family, with his children either.

All these things, each man vaguely knows in his mind, and it leads to an underlying anxiety that won't go away, and that then translates into a habitual need to use drugs, and up pops cannabis as the nice quiet solution to our anxieties, it makes all the guilt and insecurity feelings go away - while we're having the drug that is!

Now, can any of you just THINK for 5 minutes, what a dangerous thing that is???

We've got a drunk which makes anxiety and worry go away.

e.g. suppose your daughter is in a relationship with a bad person you know will make her unhappy or even harm her. YOu SHOULD be doing something about it, but all you have to do is take this drug, light up this week, and THE PROBLEM GOES AWAY.

Or maybe your son is getting bullied at school. Once again, you should do something about it, but once again, all you have to do is light up the drug and the problem goes away.

Most modern men abdicate their responsibilities for their children to women anyway, so drugs just put the finishing touch, and make men forget they ever should have had any in the first place.

So you see, this drug use, doesn't remotely mean you're a good citizen, it just means you're hiding in a safe corner, and you're letting the rest of the world go on without your intervention or aid.

YOU WROTE
 lead a full social life

MY REPLY
Do you really? What exactly do you mean by that? (as I said, I'm not being personal, what you wrote, about 100,000 other cannabis users or more woudl write pretty much the same).

Do you mean, you get together with a lot of other cannabis smokers and light up together? You tell one another your great guys and girls?

Do you mean smoking cannabis makes you less inhibited so you can have sex with women without worrying about the consequences involved if they get pregnant, or whether the long term relationship will work out?

YOU WROTE
 and have never harmed anyone by smoking a PLANT.

REPLY
I already said on another thread, which hasn't got as many posts as this, and thus has been mostly ignored, that if cannabis users could GUARANTEE that all they did was grow a plant for themselves and KEEP IT TO THEMSELVES I'd have no problem with it.

But we all know, that's not what happens in real life. What happens is, wherever people have got this habit, like some kind of virus, it spreads through and overtakes a whole community.

Chilren - espcecially boys, as most girls (apart from low lifes) will wisely HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH DRUGS OR ANYONE WHO USES THEM - are sucked into this habit, they take the drug when persuaded or offered it by a friend, under peer pressure, and then all their studies, etc. get neglected. Their parents don't know where they are, what they are doing, and why would the kids want to tell their parents, when baiscally what they are doing is being OUT OF THEIR HEADS.

This is especially true in the poorer communities, where drugs dominate neigbourhoods, and the male children underachieve in almost every case.

So there is just NO WAY you can keep this habit to yourselves, it's not just about YOUR BODY and YOUR LIFE, it's impacting everyone else's, and that you can't see that, is part of this totally self-centred attitdue, that if this drug was legalised, MILLIONS MORE would be taking it, and all neglecting all the rest of thier lives and responsiblities.

Because YOU personally can still hold down a job, that doesn't remotely mean every other cannabis user can, and generally they can't.

The other thing is you have NO IDEA how this drug is affecting you mentally, because if it is interfering with your powers of perception, you won't be aware of it.

Only other people will see it, as I said, like the numerous women who just know instinctiely that anyone who uses illegal drugs is bad news, has a serious problem of some kind, whether it's visible or not, and that's why women will accept alcohol (in moderation) but not drugs, because they can understand how alchol functiosn - mainly just for nights out.

which brings us to

YOU WROTE

I simply can't believe that the UK is so far behind the times on this subject some many other areas of the world have had this same realisation and have been inteligent enough to realise the truth, why did liebour both employing Professor Nutt if all they were going to do was oust him for simply telling the truth of his findings.

MY REPLY

As I've said before, Labour ignored their scientific advisors, because they felt they were defying common knowledge and common sesnse - i.e. that drugs are overtaking and destroying communicites by the score, and that some forms of cannabis at least, are deeply dangerous to A CERTAIN PROPORTION of people, whether or not theey are dangerous to EVERYONE, which medical science has NOT proved one way or the other.

So the bit you are overlooking, when you say this plant - don't pretend it's just a plant, DEADLY NIGHTSHADE is also a plant that KILLS people - so you can't let cannabis off on the grounds it's just a plant - is that you may not be harming any one else DIRECTLY by your cannabis use, but you may be harming YOURSELF.

Nobody knows what these drugs do, especially long term, to one's faculties, and though you might still be able to function as a comptuer programmer now, how do you know gthat will still be the case in 10 years time? YOU DON'T.

I've seen various long term cannabis users struggling with their cognitivie faculties, unable to spell things and so on that they could easily do years previously, but it seemed to take about 10 or 15 years to set in, as did the general downward change in personality, to the effect, that I saw these people had become unreliable, and could not be trusted any more.
  
YOU WROTE
The facts of the matter are that
1. The UK is skint and this seems like a great new revenue stream

REPLY
That's the VERY WORST argument I've ever heard in favour of using drugs, that they'd MAKE MORE MONEY FOR THE GOVERNMENT, but you're far from the only person who makes it.

YOU WROTE
2. It is proven far less harmful than Alcohol (which i believe is class A albeit legal please don't quote me if i am wrong)

REPLY
No it is not!

Alochol except in massive doses which are hard to even drink is a mild drug, that just causes a pleasant and uninhibited feelings in which peopel can socialise better, as long as they dn't get too drunk.

We also know that great geniuses like Leonardo da Vinci, Newton and numerous others used alcohol, but we don't know if any ever used cannabis in any quantities.

The Beatles are always cited as an example of creative drug users, but in my view, their best work was done BEFORE their drug use, and they never achieved the same heights again, and the time they seemed to be most heavily into drug use was at the time of the awful WHITE album, with all its sick "acid based" songs on it.

YOU WROTE

3. It doesn't cause other social issues like Alcohol (i.e. fighting and criminal damage on a saturday night like drunks do)

REPLY
Here's another great misconception the pro-cannabis anti-alcohol argues have.

Alcohol does not cause ANY social problems.

People do.

e.g. the French and other races and cultures drink alcohol without mass fights breaking out etc.

Alcohol is NOT the problems, it's that the people who are drhnking it in cases have got SERIOUS SOCIAL PROBLEMS.

The problems we are not addressing are jobs and careers for youth, the battle of the sexes and pitiful relationships between men and women, particularly in the lower classes.

So all alcohol is, is the CATALYST that brings these problems to a head, because unresolved conflicts are being aired when alcohols is introduced which are not being resolved outside it.

So alcohol is NOT to blame for social problems, any more than a hammer is to blame if somebody uses it to bash people on the head with, when that's not what it was made for.

YOU WROTE
4. It would stimulate business in a variety of areas and create new JOBS!

REPLY
HOw absolutely dreadful, that you would make the unemployed into drug dealers, instead of giving them REAL jobs doing something GOOD like manufacturing all the thigns we needs like cars, refrigerators, TVs and so on, and giving them jobs on the environment in recycling and so on.

If this is what a cannabis fuelled brain thinks is good, then it's just proof positive to me that the drug is doing everything I believe it is - destroying and paralyzing the judgement and commonsense of its users.

YOU WROTE
I say ban Alcohol and see how the tables would turn!!

REPLY
So now you're resorting to the childish ploy of saying if I can't have my drug (your DANGEROUS one) nobody else can have the one they like either (i.e. alcohol, the only SAFE one, that is of course IN MODERATION).

The state already acknowledges that alcohol can be dangerous if used in EXCESS. Thus is directs landlords not to serve drunks, which many responsible ones do, and also forbids us to drive cars or operate machinery while under the influence. Thus the peopel are ALREADY protected from alcohol abuse, and in some opinoins, in a very over the top manner, with numerous peopel getting convictions for drink driving, when only slightly or accidental over the limit, when they've not actually even harmed anyone.

So leaev the SOCIAL DRINKERS ALONE please, THEY are not the problem, they are not causing generations of children to forget their studies and ambitions, and spend all day long smoking dope and looking at their big toes.

YOU WROTE
This seems to have turned it a right old rant but i don't think i am alone in these feelings.

REPLY
Unfortunately, you are very far from being alone with these feelings, and as you can see, MY feelings, and many others whose lives have been adversely affected by drugs, and drug users are fully the equal of your own, and in my view, a whole lot more reasonable.

None of you is asking WHY you need this drug, which is not merely used on social occasions, like most alcohol use, but as a form of self-medication, that many cannabis users are doing almost all their waking hours.

You all have A PROBLEM that you're not admitting to, and the non-drug users who just have an occasional social drink KNOW that, as do 95% of women, and that's why as Iv'e said, you're NEVER going to get this legalisation you've called for.

So I've got no more to say about this issue, but advise you all to either EMIGRATE TO HOLLAND or elsewhere, or give up this drug, GET CLEAN, and get some kind of self-help or therapy which enables you to find out why you needed it, were ADDICTED to it - as you aall obviously are, despite all denials, because you refuse to give it up - and deal wtih whatever other problems in your life or past you are not facing up to, which cause you to need to use it.

I do not need your drug, as neigher do 90% of the population.

Why do YOU?

That should be the question you are tryign to answer, not trying to persaude everybody else to accept it as normal, when we do not see it is, and see it as s erious threat to our whole society, and will not be persuaded by the Cannabis pressure groups that it isn't, because WE'VE SEEN WITH OUR OWN EYES that cannabis is NOT SAFE to be let loose in society.

Not that I think any pro-cannabis users here will agree with me in the slighest!!!

Why, because when people have got A NEED, AN ADDICTION, they deny ALL OPPOSITION, ALL REASON that interferes with carrying out your habit.

That's WHY you can't be trusted (to write computer programs yes, but to play a responsible role in society, no), because at the end of the day your ALLEGIANCE is to no person, no cause, no society, other than that which provides you and supports your use of the drug, in thie case the evil weed (it's evil, because it robs you of your reason).

So as I said, I'm not in the slightest expecting any pro-cannabis person to agree with me, I'm writing for those who like myself KNOW this is a bad thing, and they should not cease to fight against it, becaue the ATTITUDE OF DENIAL is not far short of the mentality of a child abuser who claims he isn't doing it to you.

Every time a cannabis user introduces anyone under 18 to this habit, in my view it's a form of child abuse, because you are desteroying that person#s life, giving them what will probably become a life long addiction, and make them rejects of society, and I know very well, it's happening daily.

This govt_helper is a bit of a dick head. Truth is that the war on cannabis is lost and we will never obey such a stupid law. I am an architect with my own practice and built work throughout europe and the south pacific. I have used cannabis most days for 10 years as I prefer it to the bottle. What is your problem. You have no value in your argument and sound like you are frustrated with change. Well I will tell you things are going to chage weather you like it or not.

gov helper. you make me laugh. Look at the Netherlands. Great place compared to the UK. Also New Zealand has the highest rate of cannabis users in the world. New Zealand is one of the most if not the most peaceful country in the world.

Your problem is that you do not understand the world very well and your place in it. Start being useful and end this war on drugs. You are a criminal.

govt_helper, you make some interesting points.

However, you seem to think the only type of cannabis use is abuse. You say that alcohol is only a problem in excess; what is different about alcohol that it can be used safely and recreationally where cannabis can not?

Perhaps it is because there is a mainstream society that tolerates safe, recreational alcohol use while imposing checks, balances and social norms to discourage abuse. There are licensed, regulated establishments where people are taught/encouraged to drink alcohol safely, responsibly and socially, where you will be refused more alcohol if you have had too much, where others will give you feedback on whether your level of use is appropriate.

There are not places that cater to social cannabis use in this way. Users are scared of being arrested and having their lives ruined, encouraging withdrawal from open public society and distrust of authority, and leaving the subculture to make its own rules without limits on abuse.

If we replace the word 'cannabis' with the word 'alcohol' in your last paragraph, what is the only thing that sounds unreasonable?:
"Every time an alcohol user introduces anyone under 18 to this habit, in my view it's a form of child abuse, because you are desteroying that person#s life, giving them what will probably become a life long addiction, and make them rejects of society"

Being an adult recreational alcohol user would not make you a reject of British society - in fact it makes you ideally suited to "get the next round in mate, it's a coke for me cos I'm driving".

@govt_helper.

Still doing the rounds then I see. You never did respond to me on your "amnesty" thread, you know, the one where you said:

"science still doesn't know if aids is a gay of straight disease"

Remember? Once more, you argue points that not even your own government can. Do I need to find those 7 government reports that all stipulate that cannabis should be legal? Do I need those freedom of information acts that clearly say that the previous government were fibbing about cannabis?

Do I need to give you that history lesson again to why we're even having this debate in the first place? No, I don't think we do do we, my replies to you went unanswered, and I can't even find the thread now, where did it go? Did you get it closed? Let's take it back there again? I can't find the thread at all. I believe your final reply was "I'm all for ending western arrogance"

Last time we spoke, you were giving your "technical knowledge" on chakra's and how science has no idea of them, and how shaman use hallucinogenics to control the masses, this is where your argument ended up. You never did acknowledge- as well reasoned argument as that is- that cannabis is not a hallucinogenic.

If we have to get into all this again, then we shall have to I guess, I don't mind posting it all again, but will it get a response this time?

and p.s, once more, thank you for calling cannabis users child abusers by proxy, that's not the first time that's cropped up. The "anti" argument seems to centre around the fact we're tantamount to "paedophiles" and child abusers. Another popular anti stance that you've perpetuated is that cannabis users will not stop until we've got every kid on it that we know, this was the sentiments from your last thread. I've not forgotten that "we're the great unwashed". However, you once more never answered me, do you get your children rip roaring drunk each and every day? I take you agree with a nanny state, this is the way forward you agree?

@ govt_helper , the factual evidence that's in favor of regulation must be wrong then ? your authoritarian nationalist political ideology was bound to be irritated by this subject ,but i would sooner live in a UK where drugs are regulated than A broken by prohibition UK run by the Fascist ideology you display in your misinformed rant ,no wonder you hate it believing in the rubbish youv been strung , ,the fact is wether you like it or not , regulation does a better job at doing what prohibition sets out to do just by not creating an unregulated criminal market that sells to anyone of any age group with money regardless of what the law is , prohibition has failed because its a political paradox ,but please carry on supporting it because your lack of knowledge in the area of drugs makes the regulation model argument look 100% stronger on your own , now i NEED A CUPPA and im not even thirsty!

@ govt helper

If there are sooo many who think like you govt_helper where are they? They are perfectly free to come on here and vent their spleens like this you have.....where are they? Don't all shout at once now will you.

LOL....I wondered when child abuse would come into it....well done for leaving so late in your post you must've been itching to put that in.

To be honest I couldn't really care less whether alcohol is worse than cannabis....what alcohol drinkers do doesn't bother me in the slightest as long as they don't hurt others, (which they invariably do) but I do find it funny when someone tries to defend drinking and driving over and above someone toking in the privacy of their own home.

I wouldn't presume to judge someones personality by their use of a drug and a short post on the internet and boy do you presume a lot, you've got whole bucket loads of stereotypes there, any or all of which could easily be lifted form the pagesz of the Daily Mail. Anyway I wouldn't be so rude as to presume, I prefer to deal in facts not supposition.

If you wish to believe that cannabis users are in a state of denial that is entirely your choice. If you cannot learn from the multitudes of research papers and articles posted on this very website I am not even bothered about trying to educate you 'cos basically what you have said shows me you are set in your ways and obviously won't change your mind anyway.

But I would like to answer one of your points.

Your comment: "...and that some forms of cannabis at least, are deeply dangerous to A CERTAIN PROPORTION of people, whether or not theey are dangerous to EVERYONE, which medical science has NOT proved one way or the other."
----

If you are talking about schizophrenia and psychosis then the answer to that surely is in the numbers is it not? If there was a link between cannabis and mental illness it would show in the numbers of cases wouldn't it? The Keele Report did just that, here's what they found, although I get the feeling I'm wasting my time:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19560900

As for the rest of what you say it is a biased opinion of an alcohol drinker who is so obviously blinded by their alcohol use and it is not based on any fact anywhere....and as such in my opinion should be treated as that.....and discarded!

LAST COMMENT - I'm not answering any of you individually, because I already pointed out that I know drug addicts or any other kinds of addicts incidentally, are totally resistant to any reason or criticism of their habit.

But I will deal with the "lack of knowledge of drugs" point from

liltimmy

It's BECAUSE I clearly know about ten times more than almost everyone on this page about drugs, both in terms of their chemical and psychological effects, and their effeects on the individual and society long term, that I hold the views I do.

And MOST of my knowledge, unlike your scientists stuck in their laboratoaries COMES OFF THE STREET.

Your scientists have NO IDEA what these drugs are doing to the body and brain, and neither do any of YOU.

All you want to do here is slag off anybody who argues with legalising cannabis, but I've already explained WHY that's NEVER going to happen in this country, and for those who didn't get it the first time round, I'll repeat it here.

The only gender with any real power in this country I.E. WOMEN , are stacked almost 100% against it.

It's their number one fear, that their children or partners become drug addicts, and they are going to fight you till doomsday on this issue.

I'll bet if you check out all the 100something names poisting here, you'll struggle to find ONE SINGLE FEMALE POSTER supporting you, and if she does, she's probably also covered in tattoos and wears doc martens, has rings/piercings through her nose, etc.

So every goverment/party is nowadays mainly chasing the women's vote, so no government will do what you ask in a million years.

They fear, if their children go on drugs, they'll end up total wastrels and criminals, and there's TONS of evidence and experience that is the most likely outcome, but because you're all addicts you simply ignore ALL EVIDENCE that will interfere with your drug use or it's illegal status.

As some of you seem to have good or professional jobs, the argument becomes even stronger: why don't you EMIGRATE, and leave the rest of us to a sane, drug free country please?

You all think that by continaully pressing for this law to change, you'll get it.

It's beeen going for decades now, I've seen the legalise cannabis badges and stickers since the 60s, together with the "ban the bomb" ones, and you've had no sucess in EITHER CASE, and nor will you.

Anyway, I've had enough now banging my head against the brick wall here, because most of you - totally deluded as you are - still think you know better, think the scientists you think you have on your side know what they're talking about.

So I'm off. Good luck at dealing with YOUR ADDICTION.

I don't have it. You're the ones with the problem, NOT ME.

The only difference between us, is YOU WON'T ADMIT IT.

That's the start of CURE, first you have got to admit you've got a PROBLEM, which most of you are doing everything in your power to resist, even telling me you've got impressive job titles like "architect" or "IT expert."

All that does is appal me that so many people holding important positions are now apparently drug addicts.

But then you don't see that a dope smoker and a drug addict are the same thing, which once again, is part and parcel of this major collective delusion you're all suffering from.

Anyway, I'm not going to waste my time talking to people who have got this massive fog of unreality clouding their eyes OF CHEMICAL ORIGIN, but I challenge any one of you to see if you can do without your drug for ONE SINGLE MONTH, because if you can't, then it will prove you are addicts, just as I'm saying you are.

If however any of you actually manages to stay clean for a month, you'll probably start agreeing with everything else I say, which admittedly, might even make you so depressed, you'll seek out another hit.

It's a very tough road getting clear of addiction, most people never do, most people are TOO WEAK to beat it, and the reason is, that's it's not about how high your IQ is, or whether you've got big biceps, it's about a PERSONALITY FLAW that you don't know how to deal with.

The way to deal with it, is to study psychology and philosophy , learn about yourself and others, and once you've got enough insight, you'll start to free yourself from all these kinds of addictions, because I don't doubt most of you have got far more than only one.

Good luck and good bye.

Well thank you for yet another well reasoned reply. It would be a shame to see you go for a few reasons,

1, you are actually quite funny and I suspect you have an astute sense of irony and sarcasm.

2, however, if you are genuine, then please continue to post, you have single handedly made the regulation argument so much stronger by providing a futile argument based on more moral posturing and self inflated peacocking.

3, I have my partners position here too, you know, you speak for "100% of women because you've seen on facebook", my girl friend, partner, carer who is a highly respected civil servant who abstains from all substances, she wants me to quote her... "Do not speak for me or any woman!"

4, Thank you for adding to the post tally of this thread and making it just that little more powerful.

It has been a pleasure, if you do wish to return, we'll field you on circumstantial evidence, we'll overwhelm you on science "which doesn't count as they can't prove if aids is a straight or gay disease", and we'll certainly see to the political side of things, in fact, we have haven't we. For someone who knows more about this than us all put together, I would dearly love to see you present a case in the court of law. it would be carnage.

Love the comment that 100% of women are against drug use.....thats why all the clubs where its rampant are all empty of women (sarcasm by the way, you might need to get off the streets and get a social life to find real peoples views.

Parting comment......every crime has a victim, except if you choose to use a drug. How can something you freely choose to partake in of your own accord be considered a crime?

@govt helper

Didn't think you'd have an answer for a 45 year old mother..I was proved right again. Be careful not to drink too much won't you...it's not good for you.

@govt_helper if you think you know drug users i suggest you take a long walk.

I also suggest you rethink your comments about wasted generations and finding ones big toe! i guess you have never heard of hyper focus? look it up and while your at it research legal and social implications of prohibition and addictive drugs, you may find that people who use highly addictive drugs like heroin and crack are most affective negatively by prohibition. i am addicted to the worst drug of all, nicotene and i tell you now - if it was prohibited tomorrow id be in jail by saturday night for a ciggy related crime and just so you understand how addictive alcohol is to the type of drinker you mention - i see EVERY person i know go for the beer or wine the second they get home!!!!! that is addicition and it has a grip on NEARLY every house in this country. does it cause a social issue? i dont know im not witnessing it while i keep myself to myself smoking a quiet doobie while reading history books and GROWING brain cells - research that info too mr high and mighty "i know drug addicts" you dont know drug addicts and you dont jack!

@govt_helper - Read this - all your arguments are futile - the war on drugs is lost and illegal or not most people don't give a shit.

http://www.thescottishsun.c[…]n-drugs-top-cops-admit.html

I suggest all the anti-cannabis people go to the following links and read what's there before condemming all cannabis users as losers & junkies.

http://www.sativex.co.uk/

http://www.gwpharm.com/sativex.aspx

http://www.gwpharm.com/r-and-d.aspx

This is big business legally growing, processing & distributing skunk cannabis in the UK - so your arguments no longer hold water.

Some of us want it decriminalised for medicinal purposes.

I would rather take herbal cannabis than an opiate based pain killer anyday.

So what right have you got to deny me the basic human right to "Live a pain free exsistance"

Cannabis or any other illegal drug isn't the problem - prohibition is the problem.

With prohibition there are no controls over purity, quality or distribution - the age someone can get an illegal drug is when they can afford to buy it. With regulation it can be controlled like alcohol (18+, strength, health warnings etc).

By supporting prohibition you are directly supporting drug gangs, organised crime and terrorism (Please google 1920's alcohol prohibition for the reasons why).

so govt_helper - don't preach to me about MORALS as you are justifying the poisoning and killing the youth of England because of yours.
 

govt_helper is either a really good troll or needs some therapy.

wow govt_helper really does grab the wrong end of the stick and wiggle it vociferously!
I particularly like the 'leave the SOCIAL DRINKERS ALONE please'! Yes, that's fine, I would also suggest you leave other drug users alone, as we do with responsible adults who consume alcohol in moderation.
I do not advocate or encourage drug use in any form, however from a personal perspective, I find the usage of certain ('illegal' and 'legal') drugs, in moderation, very beneficial towards enjoying what small amounts of free time I do have.
Drugs should not be misused, but instead respected and decisions made on their usage based on sound scientific evidence, and a sense of responsibility to oneself and others around them.

guys i have been reading the posts that govt_helper has been posting in this website and believe me you are talking to a SICK islamist INTEGRIST that is preaching for the introduction of sharia in our current laws.
this guy is a sick fanatic islamist that thinks exactly the way terrorists do.
As every single integrist he is against any kind of liberties, against woman and against freedom.
i advice you all to ignore him and dont give him any chance to speak in here because our society dont have any space for fanatic integrists of his kind.

@ govt_helper- morning , i was hoping you was going to prove something with some facts , like unregulated drug dealers are a creation of prohibition and will sell any unknown substance ,cut or not to any age group as long as they have the money, the higher the risk the higher the price ,but you reverted to judgmental insults to help your cause , kids can get drugs alot easier than tobacco or alcohol which is wrong and if that's what you want to unknowingly support then please carry on ,you do such a bad job at it , it can only benefit the regulation argument !

 we can all agree that we need to protect kids from drug abuse , but adults can , will and so rightly should be allowed to do as they please / like !, if there are no victims involved there is no crime!

 under a regulation model the only victims are the criminals , breaking the gateway to new hard drug users ,one of prohibitions greatest strengths, the gateway card ,it created it and it uses it to convince its right and it can deal with it for a small tax , a classic political paradox , like stone soup , rumpole siltskin and the emperors new suit , now rather than raiding this post to educate the Darkside lets revert back to the subject "Decriminalize Cannabis along the same lines as the Netherlands" yes this is a fantastic already successful working international model that would be a real grown up approach to the UK 's cannabis situation ,but the UK version could be better than the Dutch model by regulating a licensed supply to remove all criminal connections , something that the dutch governors recognize , i know its something the RT HON DEP PM MR Clegg knows much about too , i do like reading the Dutch news with my tea in the morn

gov helper = troll, surely ? has to be, right? i mean he/she just spouts **** and never backs it up.

A Complex Link Between Marijuana and Schizophrenia

By Maia Szalavitz Wednesday, Jul. 21, 2010

Since the days of Reefer Madness, scientists have sought to understand the complex connection between marijuana and psychosis. Cannabis can cause short-term psychotic experiences, such as hallucinations and paranoia, even in healthy people, but researchers have also long noted a link between marijuana use and the chronic psychotic disorder, schizophrenia.

Repeatedly, studies have found that people with schizophrenia are about twice as likely to smoke pot as those who are unaffected. Conversely, data suggest that those who smoke cannabis are twice as likely to develop schizophrenia as nonsmokers. One widely publicized 2007 review of the research even concluded that trying marijuana just once was associated with a 40% increase in risk of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders.

But here's the conundrum: while marijuana went from being a secret shared by a small community of hepcats and beatniks in the 1940s and '50s to a rite of passage for some 70% of youth by the turn of the century, rates of schizophrenia in the U.S. have remained flat, or possibly declined. For as long as it has been tracked, schizophrenia has been found to affect about 1% of the population.

One explanation may be that the two factors are coincidental, not causal: perhaps people who have a genetic susceptibility to schizophrenia also happen to especially enjoy marijuana. Still, some studies suggest that smoking pot can actually trigger the disease earlier in individuals who are predisposed, and yet researchers still aren't seeing increases in the overall schizophrenia rate or decreases in the average age of onset.

In recent months, new research has explored some of these issues. One study led by Dr. Serge Sevy, an associate professor of psychiatry at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City, looked at 100 patients between the ages of 16 and 40 with schizophrenia, half of whom smoked marijuana. Sevy and colleagues found that among the marijuana users, 75% had begun smoking before the onset of schizophrenia and that their disease appeared about two years earlier than in those who did not use the drug. But when the researchers controlled for other factors known to influence schizophrenia risk, including gender, education and socioeconomic status, the association between disease onset and marijuana disappeared.

Gender alone accounted for a large proportion of the risk of early onset in Sevy's study, which included 69 men and 31 women. "Males in general have earlier age of onset of schizophrenia," says Sevy. In men, the disease tends to take hold around age 19, while in women it isn't typically seen until 22 — irrespective of marijuana use. But, typically, teenage boys are four times more likely than girls to be heavy pot smokers, which may create an illusory association between the drug and onset of the disease.

Yet past studies limited to males have found exactly such a link, associating marijuana use with earlier development of full-blown psychosis. And other research has found that ongoing cannabis use increases hospitalizations for psychotic symptoms in schizophrenic patients and decreases social and cognitive functioning. A 2008 review of the data found that relapse and failure to take prescribed medication was consistently associated with cannabis use, although, again, controlling for other factors weakened the link.

One explanation could be that the effects of marijuana vary depending on the genetics of the individual patient's schizophrenia. Marie-Odile Krebs, professor of psychiatry at the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) laboratory in France, and her colleagues published a study in June that identified two broad groups of people with schizophrenia who used cannabis: those whose disease was profoundly affected by their drug use and those who were not.

Within Krebs's study population of 190 patients (121 of whom had used cannabis), researchers found a subgroup of 44 whose disease was powerfully affected by the drug. These patients either developed schizophrenia within a month of beginning to smoke pot or saw their existing psychosis severely exacerbated with each successive exposure to the drug. Schizophrenia appeared in these patients nearly three years earlier than in other marijuana-users with the disease.

The key difference between the cannabis-sensitive patients and the nonaffected group was a family history of disease: those in the former group had three times the number of close relatives with psychotic disorders, says Krebs. Further, the sensitive group started smoking pot at a younger age — before age 17, compared with 18 in patients without marijuana sensitivity — and Krebs thinks the early exposure may have critically altered the development of brain receptors affected by marijuana.

These receptors, known as endocannabinoid receptors, affect the action of the brain's dopamine systems, fine-tuning the response of the neurons involved. Although this process is not yet completely understood, changing the way endocannabinoids influence dopamine during development could result in a chronically high level of dopamine in some regions of the brain, which may increase the likelihood of psychotic episodes. Stimulant drugs such as amphetamine and cocaine, which increase the action of the dopamine system, for instance, are known to produce psychotic experiences, while antipsychotic drugs work by blocking the brain's dopamine receptors.

Given that an estimated 50% of the risk for schizophrenia is attributable to genes and family history, disseminating the results of research like Krebs's could help delay the onset of disease in thousands of people and prevent years of severe disability in those with a family history of schizophrenia. Although the disease itself affects only 1% of the population, about 10% of healthy people have personality features that, when intensified, may characterize schizophrenia — such as paranoia — meaning that the proportion of the population who may be sensitive to marijuana could be larger than expected, Krebs says.

However, discouraging marijuana use in patients who have schizophrenia or are at high risk of developing it is a complicated task, not least because the drug is extremely popular with this group. Their affinity for the drug may be related to a phenomenon recently described in a study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry: The research tracked the moods of 80 marijuana smokers, 42 of whom had psychotic disorders like schizophrenia. Participants were asked to record their moods at various points over the course of six days, determined by a watch that beeped periodically to signal the volunteers. All participants, not surprisingly, reported feeling happier when they were high, but the mood-lifting effect of marijuana was stronger among smokers with schizophrenia. Unlike people without the disease, schizophrenia patients also reported a reduction in negative feelings after smoking marijuana. "Everyone feels better," explains lead author Cecile Henquet, an assistant professor of psychology and psychiatry at Maastricht University in Holland. "But [schizophrenia] patients also have less anxiety and are less socially withdrawn."

But which is the chicken and which is the egg? In another study by Sevy at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, researchers interviewed adults with schizophrenia (and their families) who smoked marijuana, and found that they reported being better adjusted during childhood than those who did not indulge. It makes sense when you consider the practicalities and social nature of drug use. Being at least somewhat socially connected is necessary to be able to obtain an illegal drug — if you appear too "crazy," people are less likely to befriend you and dealers may be too wary to sell to you. Many people with schizophrenia exhibit odd behavior that puts them at risk for social rejection years before they develop full-blown delusions and hallucinations in adulthood.

The access issue may also help explain why some studies find better — not worse — cognitive functioning in people with schizophrenia who smoke marijuana. That's what Pamela DeRosse, a research scientist at Long Island's Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, and her colleagues found in a study of 455 people with schizophrenia published in Schizophrenia Research in July. The research showed that patients who smoked marijuana had faster brain processing speed, greater verbal ability and better memory than patients who didn't smoke — not attributes usually associated with being high. "I can't really tell you why they aren't doing worse," says DeRosse. "But in order to go out to even find cannabis, enough to become dependent or abuse it, requires that you be more cognitively intact than the average patient with schizophrenia."

Indeed, many schizophrenia patients who smoke pot smoke enough to become addicted. As Henquet's study showed, the drug's mood-boosting effects appear immediately after smoking, as do some hallucinations, but the bulk of negative marijuana-related effects appear later on, as an increased rate of hallucination that affects patients even when they are not high. This is the exact type of drug effect that raises addiction risk: The user's experience is one of short-term gain associated with the drug, with long-term pain that seems unrelated. "This is what explains why patients with schizophrenia use cannabis for longer and more frequently than controls," says Henquet. "They are apparently more sensitive to the addictive potential than other people."

That marijuana can have such incompatible effects in schizophrenia patients — enhancing mood while exacerbating hallucinations and delusions — is not surprising, when its chemical makeup is considered. One chemical called delta-9 tetrahydocannabinol (THC) is known to cause hallucinations and in high doses can even make healthy people feel paranoid or suffer brief attacks of psychosis. But another component of marijuana called cannabidiol (CBD) has anti-psychotic effects.

Consequently, researchers who study the knotty relationship between drug use and schizophrenia hope that patients may one day benefit from cannabis-derived drugs. The key is to replicate the antipsychotic properties of CBD without triggering the risks carried by THC. But in the meantime, scientists are still trying to identify which patients, based on genes and family history, may be most helped by potential new pharmaceutical drugs and who may be spared harm by avoiding illicit drug use now.

http://www.time.com/[…]/0,8599,2005559,00.html

'Let the people know the truth and the country is safe.' - Abraham Lincoln

http://www.youtube.com/watc[…]amp;feature=player_embedded

THIS IS AMERICA'S WAR ON DRUGS.

THE MAN WAS ARRESTED FOR A SMALL AMOUNT OF CANNABIS.
NO OTHER LAW WAS BROKEN.

THE FAMILY PET WAS SHOT DEAD(THANKFULLY WE CAN ONLY HEAR IT HAPPEN)
HIS WIFE AND KIDS WERE TRAUMATISED FOR LIFE.

ALL FOR A BAG OF WEED...

'Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.'
J.F.K

AS WE HAVE BECOME A 'JUNIOR PARTNER', IS THIS THE FUTURE OF THE UK LAW ENFORCEMENT!?

THIS COMMENT MAY BE REMOVED BY THE MODERATORS, BUT NOT THE TRUTH!

Hi all,

I thought I'd pop over from the Section 58 (retrospective taxation) thread. Yes we are tieing neck and neck with you at the moment. Feel free to comment on retrospective taxation too. It will affect all of us eventually as HMRC become the equivalent of a lawless mafia.

Anyway, my tuppence worth on cannabis...

You only have to see Brits go and make fools of themselves in Amsterdam on the weekend to realise how criminalising cannabis in this country has not worked.

The repressive nanny state (as personified by govt_helper) have caused groups of Brits to go on drink and drugs binges in Amsterdam where they try and get out of their heads in the small amount of time they have there. They really are an embarrasment to our nation, and the Dutch wonder what all the fuss is about with a mild drug that they can enjoy in moderation.

If the govt. treated citizens like grown adults and allowed us to make decisions for ourselves, most people would take cannabis in moderation, the same as any other drug like alcohol and tobbaco.

But of course, we must be protected from ourselves, because nanny, big brother and civil servany govt_helper know best.

there is no credible study that links cannabis (the substance) as cause to schizophrenia to date , most of the longitude study have been written off by peer review for biased control or un random selection of control , but that hasn't stopped them from been used by political pressure groups or even ( govt_helper , mrs bell from the daily hate and the likes ) even going as far as funding to find a link , if there was a link it would clearly be correlated in the rise of use compared to the rate of diagnosis over a life span , there is no link , again this is what the expert advisers are there for , like professor David Nutt , who was sacked for telling the truth , rather than sacking him for no reason the royal commission should have been deployed to investigate , but now we know why he was sacked

http://www.bbc.co.uk/[…]/tension_at_heart_of_drug_classification.html

 lets not let large tabliod spin masters tell us , lets take our advice from the respected experts at the top

 !prohibition scare mongering has never worked for anybody other than those implementing it

now time for a cuppa!

Please lets stop prohibition the only argument is that its complete hypocrisy to have alcohol and tobacco legal and cannabis not. "Hypocrisy is the Greatest Luxury"

The Government must realise that by sticking with prohibition, it's doing exactly what drug dealers want? As long as it'll illegal they're going to be making massive profits from substances of unknown quality and origin, and the Government think this is a good thing? That's messed up.
It's obviously never going to go away as long as prohibition is around. Legalise and regulate.

 Posted by JoeBloggs July 22, 2010 at 13:58
'Let the people know the truth and the country is safe.' - Abraham Lincoln

http://www.youtube.com/watc[…]amp;feature=player_embedded

THIS IS AMERICA'S WAR ON DRUGS.

THE MAN WAS ARRESTED FOR A SMALL AMOUNT OF CANNABIS.
NO OTHER LAW WAS BROKEN.

THE FAMILY PET WAS SHOT DEAD(THANKFULLY WE CAN ONLY HEAR IT HAPPEN)
HIS WIFE AND KIDS WERE TRAUMATISED FOR LIFE.

ALL FOR A BAG OF WEED...

'Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.'
J.F.K

AS WE HAVE BECOME A 'JUNIOR PARTNER', IS THIS THE FUTURE OF THE UK LAW ENFORCEMENT!?

THIS COMMENT MAY BE REMOVED BY THE MODERATORS, BUT NOT THE TRUTH!

There is a section here asking for Mr Glegg to give us a personal comment. I feel we are all waiting for this, as he must know the scale of this issue. Please do not ignore us.

Legalize cannabis as soon as possible.

before ansliger started his rampage cannabis was free for everyone to use and many medical products could be purchased in liquid form, we all know about big vic smoking it for cramps! i want to know why the masses using these products were not going insane? i think we may find that the mental health issues blamed on cannabis may actually be frozen foods and a weird complex society that often goes against human nature?

The war on drugs has been linked to an increase in production and consumption. Do the maths.

agree with proposal.

the arguments have been well made both here and by independent advisers.

in fact, treat like a foodstuff - legalise entirely and apply taxation and quality control to sales of seeds and pre-prepared items.

Well, by my maths, there are a few threads vying for attention, we have the smoking ban, death penalty, and cannabis.

We've already heard the smoking ban is not to be repealed.

We know the death penalty isn't coming back without a revolution in tow.

So, by my reckoning, this is the number one topic. Call me biased if you wish, but after 80 years of partisan bias against cannabis due to lobby industries... I think I can be allowed a slight pang of bias given it is the done thing.

I look forward to comment from the Government about this issue. It is clear from the comments on this and all the drug suggestions that the law in this area has support for change away from prohibition.

THIS will be the topic that proves if this website and initiative is legitimate or just hot air.

The ironic thing is that the misuse of drugs act 1971 is actually an awesome piece of legislation that, if applied properly, is entirely fit for the purpose. Unfortunately, it is not.

http://www.drugequality.org/

Have a listen to the podcast on this page with Eddie Stratton. It's long but very interesting.

There are probably even more people who will not be posting due to the risk of the government collecting email addresses & the IP-Address they are posting from.

These will be the people growing their own already, or are having to hide from the predjudice that being a "Stoner" or "Junkie" causes - THANKS FOR NOTHING "DAILY FAIL"

using cannabis is no different from using alcohol - 97% of people will have no ill effects, 3% may have psychological problems. There will always be people that abuse substances (drink, drugs, food) but that is no excuse for making the responsible majority suffer.

THE POWERS THAT BE KNOW THAT THE WAR ON THE NATURAL HERB CAN NEVER BE WON ,STILL THEY SEEM TO DIG THEIR HEELS IN DEEPER AND DISREGARD ANY FACTS THAT PUT CANNABIS IN A POSITIVE LIGHT.NOW READ THIS BACK TO YOURSELF TWENTY/THIRTY TIMES,,,HOWEVER LONG YOU WISH, ,THEN ASK YOURSELF THIS "WHAT ARE THEY SCARED OF?" I AM SURE THEY ARE AWARE THAT CANNABIS HAS THE ABILITY TO OPEN YOUR MIND AND THINK OUT SIDE THE BOX,,WHICH CAN LEAD YOU TO ASKING QUESTIONS OF ALL SORTS,IN A WAY,IT MAKES YOU LOOK AT THINGS WITH A BIRDS EYE VIEW,YOU MAGNIFY THINGS AND IT RAISES YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS,ITS A SYMBOL OF FREE THINKING! NOW IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE PEOPLE IN SO CALLED CHARGE OF EVERYTHING,DO NOT WANT TO PROMOTE FREE THINKING,BUT RATHER WANT TO SHUN IT,,,HOWEVER ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION IS TRADITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE? BEING DUMBED DOWN AND THINKING LESS AND BEING ALMOST CAVEMAN LIKE,IS ACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOUR BY THE MASSES? THUS EASIER TO CONTROL....YES I DO SMELL SOME LARGE RATS AND THEIR SMELL IS BRINGING ME CLOSE TO VOMITING.

DONT GET ME STARTED ON HEMPS USES AND ITS VERY REAL THREAT TO BIG PHARMACY AND THE WORLD BANKERS AND THE OIL COMPANIES AND THE OTHERS,,,GODDAMN IT THOSE PEOPLE CAN NOT AFFORD FOR CANNABIS TO BE SEEN IN A POSITIVE LIGHT,,,IN FACT THE CANNABIS PLANT COULD WELL BE ONE OF THE BIGGEST WAYS OF EXPOSING THE CORRUPTION OF ALL THEM PUPPET MASTERS,,,,THEY RELY ON ALL THE FOLK WHO ARE STILL ASLEEP AND USE MAINSRTEAM MEDIA TO MAKE THEIR DECISIONS FOR THEM.I EMPLORE ANYONE TO FIND THE REAL FACTS BEFORE THE INTERNET IS BUTCHERED AND EDITED SO YOU ONLY HAVE ACCESS TO FACTS THAT THEY THINK YOU NEED TO KNOW!

Sorry to spam but, Cannabis doesn't need 'legalizing', legislation needs changing to reflect the Constitutional rights of the people of this nation, which are being violated by the Misuse of Drugs Act.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]ibition-is-unconstitutional

Thanks for your time, and don't hesitate to rate, comment and ask questions about my entry.

Tom

@ martynjhorne

cant agree more with you!

when is clegg going to decide to speak about cannabis?

Ok, I know we're all supposed to ignore this fact, but there is an Elephant in the room with cannabis, let's address it for a change, we all know why we're having to fight this in the first place:

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.[…]power-are-killing-democracy

Prohibition finds organised crime and encourages dangerous produce. Tax (partly based on the risk) and regulation work for drink and tobacco, and law should protect people from others, not from their own actions.

@martynjhorne

STOP SHOUTING! I can read lower case words fine....

Slightly off-topic but I think it needs raising.

I spotted a poster at the local chemist warning of Anthrax contamination in Heroin and that users may die from it.

Nothing in the press or on the news or from the government - shows how much they are bothered about drug users. If it was the bankers/stockbrokers favorite "Coke" I bet it would be different (probably not after the mess they got the country into).

They couldn't care less if "Druggies" are being poisened by the crap dealers put in drugs (or they would have made this a health issue years ago).

That is until it's their innocent son/daughter who's ill then it's the fault of drugs & so the myths & hysteria are self perpetuating.

Agree with penrhos, if the governments of past actually cared about health and not votes, they would have taken action on these issues long ago.

I mean, Thatcher for goodness sake, she even initiated the needle exchange, how controvertible was that? But she stuck to her guns and we as a action looked out for our own and lowered HIV rates, and we've had a steady rate of 1% HIV rate in users, compared to Russia who have a 100% judicial service and not a single health measure, and they have a 60% HIV rate.

Ending prohibition is the only way to reduce usage on any substance and protect health... unless you're in the alcohol industry in which case you are allowed to plough your money into the government, spend billions on advertising, and just generally operate outside the rules with regards to drugs and health.

I am also waiting for the deputy PM to address the cannabis issue. Legalization is the way out of this mess.

Mr Clegg please listen to us as we are not going to go away.

@homegrownoutlaw

The problem is if the russian guy gets elected to the UN then he is a hard-line prohibitionist and all the good work the UNODC have done to try and change the drugs policy to one of a health and education issue from a policing issue could be undone.

@penrhos

It's already been done, Ban Ki-moon has already made his decision.

http://www.unodc.org/unodc/[…]ector-of-unodc.html?ref=fs6

Oh great, things have taken a step back then. We await the hard line stance again then, because we've not tried that enough!

It remains to be seen how much influence he does actually have, the harm reduction approach has been taken on board by most of Europe and I can't see them being prepared to take a hard line approach not when they can see the situation in Russia. So we'll have to wait and see. They may just become an organisation that increasingly is out of step. Let's hope so.

To a certain extent Maria Costa was seen as an embarrassment with his outbursts in conferences and weird attitudes, and he has largely been ignored by Europe who have got on with harm reduction in their own countries over the past few years. It was only in the last couple of months of his tenure that he claimed harm reduction was the best way forward.

nuclear war on drugs ☮ !

all I can say is the case is closed as far as the evidence go's ,prohibition has failed , regulation is better than prohibition because anything other than regulation would be stepping back into the prohibition trap and everything that's not prohibition is regulation , its not a matter to argue no more, the evidence is on the table , its a matter of prove it , prove prohibition is the right thing to do in light of the facts and evidence that are not biased in control ,show us its done what it said it would do , this is a turning point in time where the evidence is final ,prohibition can no longer convince the weak through its hypocrisy lies and propaganda thanks to the Internet and international communication and it has no evidence to prove it has achieved what it has set out to do , where the regulation model and system has in every case and will no doubt be a target of sabotage by the same implementing demons that push prohibition (the lie) around the world like the devils helpers been fooled into helping the mythical beast rise again, no I rephrase that, not "like" , they are! prohibition just needs remembering so we are not to be fooled by its lies for a third time! and those that attempt to implement such a paradox into government need locking up for treason! scallywags!

                                                                                                       

Why can we not be intelligent about this situation? This war has been going on for years now and not yielded the results we were promised. This war has resulted in the deaths of thousands, and millions of people being cast from society just because they enjoy to use cannabis. So who are the murderers?

The evidence is here and the evidence for legalization is overbearing. So as we are all waiting for Mr Clegg to comment on one of the largest issues on this freedom site, I would suggest that he starts to see that we are here and will not go away.
Imagine in 10 years if we follow this same path? Drug dealers with military clout in the UK. It will come and so will dispair and dread if we do not legalize, tax and regulate.

And another thing I have noticed here is that all of those against legalization do not have any strength t their arguments.

Clegg, please do the right thing!

Why can we not be intelligent about this situation? This war has been going on for years now and not yielded the results we were promised. This war has resulted in the deaths of thousands, and millions of people being cast from society just because they enjoy to use cannabis. So who are the murderers?

The evidence is here and the evidence for legalization is overbearing. So as we are all waiting for Mr Clegg to comment on one of the largest issues on this freedom site, I would suggest that he starts to see that we are here and will not go away.
Imagine in 10 years if we follow this same path? Drug dealers with military clout in the UK. It will come and so will dispair and dread if we do not legalize, tax and regulate.

And another thing I have noticed here is that all of those against legalization do not have any strength t their arguments.

Clegg, please do the right thing!

people talk of skunk if it were something new. Its been here for decades now and has been deployed as a term used by those in power to scare the masses. Hey why not try some charas hashish or morrocan hashish. Just as in whines we have many tastes and styles to cater for all, as in cannabis we also have.

people talk of skunk if it were something new. Its been here for decades now and has been deployed as a term used by those in power to scare the masses. Hey why not try some charas hashish or morrocan hashish. Just as in whines we have many tastes and styles to cater for all, as in cannabis we also have.

this from Release UK. http://www.release.org.uk/news/latest-news

Posted by Architect July 25, 2010 at 11:30
Why can we not be intelligent about this situation? This war has been going on for years now and not yielded the results we were promised. This war has resulted in the deaths of thousands, and millions of people being cast from society just because they enjoy to use cannabis. So who are the murderers?

You could swap Cannabis for Iraq or Afganistan - The answer is clear the governments of the USA & UK.

Since invading Afganistan it is now easier to get good quality Heroin round here than un-adulterated weed - What more of a link do they need.

If they ever decriminalise cannabis I'd probably grow my own - not the "Skunk" they all panic about but some nice old-school weed that's mild and tasty.

Posted by Architect July 25, 2010 at 11:30
Why can we not be intelligent about this situation? This war has been going on for years now and not yielded the results we were promised. This war has resulted in the deaths of thousands, and millions of people being cast from society just because they enjoy to use cannabis. So who are the murderers?

You could swap Cannabis for Iraq or Afganistan - The answer is clear the governments of the USA & UK.

Since invading Afganistan it is now easier to get good quality Heroin round here than un-adulterated weed - What more of a link do they need.

If they ever decriminalise cannabis I'd probably grow my own - not the "Skunk" they all panic about but some nice old-school weed that's mild and tasty.

True. If it were legal then it would be organic, used in cooking and also for making great hashish.

Prohabition allows for all sorts of rubbish to be put into our cannabis, glass, lead etc etc.

legalize, tax, regulate, control.

@Architect

Thanks for the Release link, good info especially the report into the heroin trials, been waiting to read that.

@Penrhos

Why do you talk about skunk as though it were different from other cannabis?

Skunk, according to the government is a specific type of cannabis...when in reality skunk IS cannabis. All they are describing is the flowers or bud. To use the term skunk in the way you do gives the impression you have bought into the Daily Mail propaganda. There is enough bull going around about this plant as it is without its advocates buying into it, 'cos it just confuses those who don't have knowledge about the subject.

There is no 'super high strength skunk', it is a propaganda tool used by the government, pure and simple.

I feel we need to push now for Mr Clegg to give us a video response with regards to cannabis. We need to get together to do this.

Another thing someone else here mentioned was taking this to the media?

This government MUST legalize cannabis and before 2011!

to all cannabis supportere and to all those who wants it to be legalized and to all those who opposing themselves to this idea
watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yokaDVvx4OY
whatever happens whatever the governement decides this is my advice to all of you.

to all cannabis supportere and to all those who wants it to be legalized and to all those who opposing themselves to this idea
watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yokaDVvx4OY
whatever happens whatever the governement decides this is my advice to all of you.

to all cannabis supportere and to all those who wants it to be legalized and to all those who opposing themselves to this idea
watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yokaDVvx4OY
whatever happens whatever the governement decides this is my advice to all of you.

'Skunk' (the term as used colloquially) is the non pollinated female flowers of the cannabis plant and is the only part of the plant that contains any noticeable cannabinoids. The male plants flowers and the large fan leaves of all cannabis plants contain only trace quantities of cannabinoids. Pollinated female flowers stop producing cannabinoids and the cannabinoids already present in the flower start to decompose.
'Weed' is used to refer to all types of herbal cannabis although it is generally used to describe cannabis product that includes fan leaves, male plants and pollinated female flowers (This is why it tends to contain large quantities of seed). It is 'weaker' than skunk but only because it contains less skunk.
'Hash' is a product that has existed for hundreds if not thousands of years and is produced by collecting trichomes which are small crystal like structures that form on the surface of the female flowers (skunk). The strongest types of cannabis are hashish as the trichomes contain cannabinoids and little else. Unfortunately hash is easier to adulterate than herbal cannabis and it is well known that the UK generally got the lowest quality of hash entering Europe throughout the 1980's and 90's. The hash that the other Europeans did not want for themselves ended up in the UK.
Skunk production started in Europe in the late 1970's and requires the plants to be grown under lights and protected from cold weather as the northern European climate is not suitable for cannabis cultivation. The popularity of skunk in the UK grew because it could be produced in the UK and wasn't full of rubbish* (unlike the hash that was available through the organised criminal smugglers).
In the end skunk is probably better for you than weed as you don’t have to consume so much plant material to get the same level of effect however pure hash is better still (GW Pharmaceuticals sell hash oil as medicine).
When hash is produced carefully it is far stronger than any herbal form. When the hash was weak people smoked more of it to compensate (and therefore smoked more of the adulterants). Humans do tend to regulate their own drug use, just because people want to drink pints of beer does not mean that they want to drink pints of spirits and if people don’t want to get heavily stoned they just consume less cannabis.

*Skunk became so popular that the organised criminal smugglers had to switch to it instead of hash and they have since found ways to adulterate it with crushed glass and worse.

'Skunk' (the term as used colloquially) is the non pollinated female flowers of the cannabis plant and is the only part of the plant that contains any noticeable cannabinoids. The male plants flowers and the large fan leaves of all cannabis plants contain only trace quantities of cannabinoids. Pollinated female flowers stop producing cannabinoids and the cannabinoids already present in the flower start to decompose.
'Weed' is used to refer to all types of herbal cannabis although it is generally used to describe cannabis product that includes fan leaves, male plants and pollinated female flowers (This is why it tends to contain large quantities of seed). It is 'weaker' than skunk but only because it contains less skunk.
'Hash' is a product that has existed for hundreds if not thousands of years and is produced by collecting trichomes which are small crystal like structures that form on the surface of the female flowers (skunk). The strongest types of cannabis are hashish as the trichomes contain cannabinoids and little else. Unfortunately hash is easier to adulterate than herbal cannabis and it is well known that the UK generally got the lowest quality of hash entering Europe throughout the 1980's and 90's. The hash that the other Europeans did not want for themselves ended up in the UK.
Skunk production started in Europe in the late 1970's and requires the plants to be grown under lights and protected from cold weather as the northern European climate is not suitable for cannabis cultivation. The popularity of skunk in the UK grew because it could be produced in the UK and wasn't full of rubbish* (unlike the hash that was available through the organised criminal smugglers).
In the end skunk is probably better for you than weed as you don’t have to consume so much plant material to get the same level of effect however pure hash is better still (GW Pharmaceuticals sell hash oil as medicine).
When hash is produced carefully it is far stronger than any herbal form. When the hash was weak people smoked more of it to compensate (and therefore smoked more of the adulterants). Humans do tend to regulate their own drug use, just because people want to drink pints of beer does not mean that they want to drink pints of spirits and if people don’t want to get heavily stoned they just consume less cannabis.

*Skunk became so popular that the organised criminal smugglers had to switch to it instead of hash and they have since found ways to adulterate it with crushed glass and worse.

OK, we may as well end the thread here. I checked out the text of the 4th TV debate, transcribed in The Independent and basically Messrs Cameron and Clegg are trotting out the usual old excuses;

1- "Protecting the young". They prefer this to be left to the tender mercies of the drug dealers.
2- "Controlling illegal drugs using present law". Well that's worked so well hasn't it.

I would advise everyone to not bother posting any more on this subject - as far as I can see it's not taken seriously at all. This particular subject has more comments in favour of legalisation/regulation than any other - yet it will be ignored or, at best, put to a parliamentary vote where the Daily Mail readers will be the first and only group given consideration.

There will be no protest or march in favour of decriminalising; not because pot smokers have no motivation, but because there will be no point - the decision has already been made. The Status Quo wins again, and we are all diminished and criminalised by it. Which would appear to be exactly what this government wants, in common with almost all others.

govt_helper is trying a hatchet job, but chooses to gloss over dozens of points. Plenty of women smoke cannabis. It does not make anyone less protective towadrs their children. I can't even begin to go over all the points s/he raises as they conflict at so many levels.

We all know booze kills people. We all know nobody has ever died due to the effects of cannabis (although probably quite a few gang members have due to it's being illegal). We know that Hurst, the American industrialist, lobbied the US Government for it's being made illegal in order to protect his wood-pulp profits.

It's a plant, for Gods Sake. It's possible to get high on Hydrangea leaves, Catnip, Broom, dozens of other plants. When will the government be banning them? Never. They're not a threat to anyone's profit margins.

I seriously believe it is only because this plant is so useful that the fact humans smoke it is used as an excuse to retain illegality.

Don't argue with vested interests, no matter how good your argument and how bad the law is against it. Waste of time.

OK, we may as well end the thread here. I checked out the text of the 4th TV debate, transcribed in The Independent and basically Messrs Cameron and Clegg are trotting out the usual old excuses;

1- "Protecting the young". They prefer this to be left to the tender mercies of the drug dealers.
2- "Controlling illegal drugs using present law". Well that's worked so well hasn't it.

I would advise everyone to not bother posting any more on this subject - as far as I can see it's not taken seriously at all. This particular subject has more comments in favour of legalisation/regulation than any other - yet it will be ignored or, at best, put to a parliamentary vote where the Daily Mail readers will be the first and only group given consideration.

There will be no protest or march in favour of decriminalising; not because pot smokers have no motivation, but because there will be no point - the decision has already been made. The Status Quo wins again, and we are all diminished and criminalised by it. Which would appear to be exactly what this government wants, in common with almost all others.

govt_helper is trying a hatchet job, but chooses to gloss over dozens of points. Plenty of women smoke cannabis. It does not make anyone less protective towadrs their children. I can't even begin to go over all the points s/he raises as they conflict at so many levels. Comparing cannabis users repeatedly to child abusers is, seriously, the deduction of an abusive mind themself.

We all know booze kills people. We all know nobody has ever died due to the effects of cannabis (although probably quite a few gang members have due to it's being illegal). We know that Hurst, the American industrialist, lobbied the US Government for it's being made illegal in order to protect his wood-pulp profits.

It's a plant, for Gods Sake. It's possible to get high on Hydrangea leaves, Catnip, Broom, dozens of other plants. When will the government be banning them? Never. They're not a threat to anyone's profit margins.

I seriously believe it is only because this plant is so useful that the fact humans smoke it is used as an excuse to retain illegality.

Don't argue with vested interests, no matter how good your argument and how bad the law is against it. Waste of time.

and in another ten years when the gang members and leaders carry more clout than our militry will we be smiling?

Stupid government. If you do not legalize you will have hell to pay.

do you think people will follow such a stupid law. What are you going to do? Give us all 14 years, hahaha. I have smoked for ten years and in public. The cops never caught me. The law is crap.

Everyone plant cannabis and grow hundreds of plants now.

This is the thing, as you've all said, sit on the fence now, pay for it later, and probably not too much later. I could well envisage the need for military on the domestic scene too.

There are some powerful people out there now on the back of this, as politicians sit on their hands because they're worried about the latest poll that shows them dropping a few points, there is someone getting shot, stabbed, crying out in pain because the system doesn't credit the individual with sense, money exchanging hands in the billions, and kids taking it freely and unabated. Any humanitarian would step in, anyone with morals would take charge, will any UK politician? Well, you'll forgive the jaded thoughts and lack of faith, but we've been let down more times than a society can forgive. We have had it proven time and again, TIME and AGAIN that we have been led by corruption and self serving pragmatists.

We know too much, we know the ins and outs of this corruption, the previous government added tenfold to the loss of respect and faith in governance, I shall hold tenuous faith just for a while longer as we have a clean slate, it is my duty as a citizen to do so, and it is the job of government to win my confidence.
 
I would urge that anyone who is not familiar with this topic, anyone who simply glimpses it from a view on the world that is removed and distant, do not rest on your laurels that Britain will not crumble into civil unrest, with the amount of money involved in this, and with the undesirables that control this industry, and it is an industry that will only grow to from this point on, they hold complete power. Anyone would be a fool to see that we're not just around the corner from some dark dark days.

This is the thing, as you've all said, sit on the fence now, pay for it later, and probably not too much later. I could well envisage the need for military on the domestic scene too.

There are some powerful people out there now on the back of this, as politicians sit on their hands because they're worried about the latest poll that shows them dropping a few points, there is someone getting shot, stabbed, crying out in pain because the system doesn't credit the individual with sense, money exchanging hands in the billions, and kids taking it freely and unabated. Any humanitarian would step in, anyone with morals would take charge, will any UK politician? Well, you'll forgive the jaded thoughts and lack of faith, but we've been let down more times than a society can forgive. We have had it proven time and again, TIME and AGAIN that we have been led by corruption and self serving pragmatists.

We know too much, we know the ins and outs of this corruption, the previous government added tenfold to the loss of respect and faith in governance, I shall hold tenuous faith just for a while longer as we have a clean slate, it is my duty as a citizen to do so, and it is the job of government to win my confidence.
 
I would urge that anyone who is not familiar with this topic, anyone who simply glimpses it from a view on the world that is removed and distant, do not rest on your laurels that Britain will not crumble into civil unrest, with the amount of money involved in this, and with the undesirables that control this industry, and it is an industry that will only grow to from this point on, they hold complete power. Anyone would be a fool to see that we're not just around the corner from some dark dark days.

This is the thing, as you've all said, sit on the fence now, pay for it later, and probably not too much later. I could well envisage the need for military on the domestic scene too.

There are some powerful people out there now on the back of this, as politicians sit on their hands because they're worried about the latest poll that shows them dropping a few points, there is someone getting shot, stabbed, crying out in pain because the system doesn't credit the individual with sense, money exchanging hands in the billions, and kids taking it freely and unabated. Any humanitarian would step in, anyone with morals would take charge, will any UK politician? Well, you'll forgive the jaded thoughts and lack of faith, but we've been let down more times than a society can forgive. We have had it proven time and again, TIME and AGAIN that we have been led by corruption and self serving pragmatists.

We know too much, we know the ins and outs of this corruption, the previous government added tenfold to the loss of respect and faith in governance, I shall hold tenuous faith just for a while longer as we have a clean slate, it is my duty as a citizen to do so, and it is the job of government to win my confidence.
 
I would urge that anyone who is not familiar with this topic, anyone who simply glimpses it from a view on the world that is removed and distant, do not rest on your laurels that Britain will not crumble into civil unrest, with the amount of money involved in this, and with the undesirables that control this industry, and it is an industry that will only grow to from this point on, they hold complete power. Anyone would be a fool to see that we're not just around the corner from some dark dark days.

Mort said:
>>OK, we may as well end the thread here. I checked out the
>>text of the 4th TV debate, transcribed in The Independent and
>>basically ...

4th debate? Are you talking about the televised party leader debates before the election? There were only three of those.

Perhaps you could provide a link?

@MattForFreedom

"'Skunk' (the term as used colloquially) is the non pollinated female flowers of the cannabis plant...

--------

No it isn't, the non pollinated female flowers are called sensimillia meaning 'without seed'....and just because some bud smells more than others does not make it skunk. Skunk #1, (the original skunk) wasn't particularly potent either...having a thc level of around 16%.

Maybe skunk is the term used on your streets, by the government and 'Frank' to describe bud but it is not the correct term. You can't just throw away thousands of years of correct terminology just because you want to use what has effectively become a slang term.

Yes what you say homegrownoutlaw is true. For those of you against legalization I tell you to read everything on these posts. There is a post asking for a personal comment from Mr Clegg himself. Why is this such a hard thing for him to do. The 9th of July is past and he needs to be on the ball with this issue of legalizing cannabis. We are not going to be fooled and we certainly are not going to stop the use of a great herb. We will not go away and I tell you all now we are united in our fight for freedom!

I will be clear as there are some seriously inteligent comments backed up by fact here, and I wish not to reiterate on them.

Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron. You know the solution.

Legalize, tax, regulate and control cannabis.

This is the start. Then maybe we will begin to trust you. Do it fast as well. It is urgent as there are some mighty boss men out there that run the illegal drug market who you probably should fear. You have the key to stop this torment and why past governments ever believed in it leaves me bewildered.

I will finish by telling you this. I never touched cannabis until I was 22 years of age. I have smoked for over a decade on most days and also eaten cannabis. I enjoy a glass of red wine and a mellow charas hashish spliff followed by several productive hours painting and doing architecture late into the night. I do not think I would be doing this if I were siting in the pup. Cannabis is safe enough to legalize and this must be understood. People can overdose on television where they live everyday thinking they are the stars of soap operas and the like. One can by enough alcohol in the corner store to intoxicate a small town. Rediculous that an ancient herb is ilegal.

Please listen to us also. We have asked here for you to comment ans also on another thread. Here even the moderator agrees.

Legalize tax regulate

bring it on!

'Maybe skunk is the term used on your streets, by the government and 'Frank' to describe bud but it is not the correct term.'
Er, I was just pointing out what the word 'skunk' is used to refer to in practice. I don’t deny it is a slang term and I know it is also called sensimillia however I do not hear many people, users or otherwise, use the term sensimillia, most users in the UK call it skunk.
'You can't just throw away thousands of years of correct terminology just because you want to use what has effectively become a slang term.'
1) The word sensimillia is derived from Spanish not Latin and the term has not existed for thousands of years.
2) Slang words are only slang words until their practical usage is accepted by broad society.
3) I was only trying to explain to people who don't understand what the term (albeit a slang term) is used to refer to in practice.
4) You don't seem to understand what 'colloquially' means.
5) You can call anything whatever the hell you like so long as other people understand what you are referring to. English is not a dead language and new words are created, old words forgotten and meaning and use of words change all the time.
I don't understand why you've got you're knickers in a twist about this, you've misunderstood me and the gone on a misdirected quest of pedantry.

I used the term "Skunk" as that is the tabliod's use that most people will relate too.

In Amsterdam my preffered smokes are Chocoloupe, Strawberry haze or LA Confidential.

If cannabis was decriminalised then I think it's important to point out that there would be a choice and that people wouldn't smoke what the media get hysterical about.

Alcohol prohibition created "Moonshine" cannabis prohibition has created "Skunk" - both are just generic words.

I used the term "Skunk" as that is the tabliod's use that most people will relate too.

In Amsterdam my preffered smokes are Chocoloupe, Strawberry haze or LA Confidential.

If cannabis was decriminalised then I think it's important to point out that there would be a choice and that people wouldn't smoke what the media get hysterical about.

Alcohol prohibition created "Moonshine" cannabis prohibition has created "Skunk" - both are just generic words for strong stuff.

I used the term "Skunk" as that is the tabliod's use that most people will relate too.

In Amsterdam my preffered smokes are Chocoloupe, Strawberry haze or LA Confidential.

If cannabis was decriminalised then I think it's important to point out that there would be a choice and that people wouldn't smoke what the media get hysterical about.

Alcohol prohibition created "Moonshine" cannabis prohibition has created "Skunk" - both are just generic words for strong stuff.

Just back from the pub, where I had a conversation with my non cannabis smoking friends. We talked about how our city centers have become no go areas at nights because of alcohol, and drug turf wars. The son of one friend worked in Kingston town centre, where there were regular drug related shootings. I suffered the same when I lived in Kensal Green. Another friend talked at a party to the head of organised crime fighting in London ten years ago, who said that the police can’t even keep the lid on this kind of crime these days.

We all agreed that prohibition does not work. It is as simple as that. It is not fit for purpose. Prohibition does not make our streets safer, it does not make our youths safer, it does not make our communities safer. It does provide gangs with money to buy guns, and the incentive to use them. It does mean that those that take drugs get unregulated product cut with all sorts of rubbish. It does put those that decide to take them in an unnecessary conflict with the law, for what is a victimless ‘crime.’

Deputy Prime Minister, you know all this. You are intelligent, and at least seem to be an honorable man, please, bring some sanity to this issue. It is time to be brave. It is time to grab the bull by the horns. It is time to cut the funding from the gangs.

Legalise it. Regulate it and Tax it.

pahkola cant agree more with you ! hope clegg would listen to you

 As it's clear now, despite the fact when police confiscate marihuana they say to the users "You are under arrest for possesion of a 'CONTROLLED' drug, prohibition has been an abysmal failure.

The reasons for this is clear. Marihuana is not known to cause any damage to users in comparison with substances such as alcohol and tobbaco or even caffeine which apparantly are infact more addictive than cannabis. Yes, I understand that marihuana affects each individual in very different ways but it's not so serious that it should be illigal where as killer substances such as alcohol or tobbaco or even caffeine which is known to cause deaths is legal.

Many people go under the assumption (which is probably because of all this false government propaganda) that you can only smoke cannabis. Therefore suggesting that marihuana causes damage to your lungs, the talk to Frank website doesn't even mention that marihuana can be eaten or vaporised (where the cannabis is heated so only the THC is released in vapour form, therefore not causing any damage at all to the users lungs). In my honest opinion (I could indeed be wrong however) marihuana CAN have a bad effect long term on about 2/3's of peoples lives.

I was watching a program about Amsterdam and what the people who don't take it think of Cannabis and other 'soft' drugs. All of which either said they don't smoke cannabis out of personal choice but they are friends with people who do and it really doesn't affect their friendship and are confident the cannabis using friends are quiet fine as well. Or they may say that they don't know anyone who does smoke cannabis but they feel its a harmless drug just like alcohol or anything else which is fine in moderation. THAT is how it should be in this country it should be a matter of personal choice, yes it can be bad on some people, but the thing is most of the time they will know it has a bad effect on them.

I am a recreational cannabis user and i'm not afraid to admit it. I know how to take it in moderation, just as with anything else I've smoked it regularly but i realised doing that makes me lose touch with reality and cause other such problems so immediatly i cut my use of the soft drug easily as of course unlike the false government propaganda says cannabis is not addictive like for instance tobbaco.

Instead of spreading maybe's and could's about affects which havn't been proven to have directly taken effect on users despite the fact cannabis has been used for hundreds of years, not a few months like the new drugs circulating (methadrone etc) the government could instead legalise it and really control it (have it sold legally for over 18's i have been smoking cannabis responsibly since I was 16, it was easier to get than alcohol, i didn't even have to use my fake ID) The government could instead educate on the effects of Cannabis just as they did before but not with false propaganda such as the famous skitsophrenia claims or assumptions (I think it was that it COULD cause skitsophrenia in 1 in 10 users or something).

I do hope this argument doesn't fall on death ears...

pahkola I also agree with you.

Legalize, tax, regulate (CONTROL)

Mr Clegg, pleaase do the correct and sane thing.

Cannabis is an herb which has been used, both medically and recreationally for thousands of years. It's only in the last hundred years or so that certain governments, including our own, have seen fit to use prohibition to stop the use of this drug. this has not worked, there are probably more cannabis users now than ever before, these are generally normal and well balanced people with jobs and families who make positive contributions to society. Isn't it time we stopped criminalizing these people for using a substance which is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco?

The governments banned marihuana on false beliefs such as the smallest amount could kill you. It's impossible to have a lethal dose of THC as you can't consume enough THC in a certain amount of time. Back in those days THC was a fraction of what it is now clearly so clearly that was false propaganda.

The government propaganda that modern high THC level marihuana is worst for you is a complete lie, if anything it's better for you as if your smoking it (you can vaporise marihuana meaning no carcinogens will be going to your lungs) you dont have to smoke loads of marihuana, hence loads of carcinogens to get a high. I suppose its like wanting to get drunk whilst wanting to put as less calories as possible on, the best way would be to drink something with high alcohol levels such as for instance 30% vodka over 5% beer.

It should be decriminalised then to boost the economy and put thousands in work boost the economy which it will it should be regulated like alcohol or tobbaco and taxed. The economy would benefit so well i can't understand why it's still illigal for some pathetic reasons, i think the government is hiding something. Also hemp can be used for paper fuel food and all sorts benefitting both the environment and industry.

The amount of money we would make would be unreal as good cannabis can be grown outdoors in the UK in the summer (many dont believe this) and indoors so we don't have to import anything. In the US it is already the number one cash crop and it isnt only for medicinal purposes and many states still don't accept it.

We should at least hold it to a vote just as they are doing this November in California. We cannot be ignored! Why moan about how hard we have to fight to get out of this recession when all you have to do is use common sense and regulate something which is generally harmless. Do you know how many tourists we would get from legalising it? Look at amsterdam, it's name is immortalised for its cannabis policies vast numbers of tourists go there a year.