Legalisation & Govenment control/supply of drugs and "legal hi

[ROY]

I have seen so many debates on this forum regarding the legalisation of cannabis and so many people going on about long term use leading to psychosis. I would really love to see some of the evidence for this.

[deaquire]

You'd need manufacturing facilities. You'd have to hire people with degrees to manage and process the entire thing. This would increase property sales and provide more professional jobs. You'd need storage facilities which would have to be secured, ergo a boost in careers within G4S. For those with few qualifications, the drugs would need delivering to chemists across the country. Give van drivers a thorough induction, and treat the drugs the same way security firms treat gold. The chemists would need additional security, so let's give work to security firms installing new hardware to keep out undesirables. You could privatise the entire thing and tax it through the eyeballs. You could pour money into research to create the finest drugs but what would be the point? There are Columbians who know it better than any who will produce it for pennies a day. Because of that you could hire additional border control, to stop substances coming into the country from abroad and driving the price down.

A UN report said the global drug trade generated an estimated US$321.6 billion in 2003. That's ten years ago, account for inflation and an increasing population and you could increase that by 20% easily. Add in professional management and who knows what it would be worth.

 

Wrote this on the other thread, definitely think it has merit.

[aris]

I have seen so many debates on this forum regarding the legalisation of cannabis and so many people going on about long term use leading to psychosis. I would really love to see some of the evidence for this.

 

There is much conflicting evidence - and there is no guarantee of psychosis if you smoke cannabis, much like there is no guarantee of lung cancer if you smoke cigarettes, or liver disease if you drink heavily. There are always other factors - such as genetics. Also it would appear that the potency of the cannabis is also a factor (THC content). So while there is no guarantee, the changes of psychosis are higher.

 

Wikipedia has a thorough article with references under the 'Mental Health' heading.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_cannabis

[deaquire]

 

There is much conflicting evidence - and there is no guarantee of psychosis if you smoke cannabis, much like there is no guarantee of lung cancer if you smoke cigarettes, or liver disease if you drink heavily. There are always other factors - such as genetics. Also it would appear that the potency of the cannabis is also a factor (THC content). So while there is no guarantee, the changes of psychosis are higher.

 

Wikipedia has a thorough article with references under the 'Mental Health' heading.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_cannabis

 

Wiki definitely doesn't count. It could have been written by a child.

[aris]

 

Wiki definitely doesn't count. It could have been written by a child.

 

You don't have to believe the wiki - follow the reference links.

[deaquire]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHzdsFiBbFc

[ROY]

Thats actually a very well reasoned artical for wiki. However most of the trial seem to suggest rather than produce solid evidence.

 

Indeed the following taken from the artical actually suggests the opposite.

 

Cannabidiol in the treatment of schizophrenia[edit]

As early as 2006, it was hypothesized based on a variety of animal and clinical evidence that cannabidiol (a cannabinoid present in cannabis) may be an effective atypical antipsychotic in treating schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.^[61] Further research supported these results. A double-blind controlled clinical trial conducted in 2009 compared the effects of cannabidiol with those of the atypical antipsychotic amisulpride in 42 patients with acute paranoid schizophrenia. The study concluded that "both treatments were associated with a significant decrease of psychotic symptoms after 2 and 4 weeks as assessed by BPRS and PANSS. However, there was no statistical difference between both treatment groups. In contrast, cannabidiol induced significantly less side effects (EPS, increase in prolactin, weight gain) when compared to amisulpride."^[62] This led the authors to suggest the endocannabinoid system plays an adaptive role in the development of paranoid schizophrenia and may therefore be a valuable treatment target.^[

[ROY]

Heres another interesting artical.

 

http://ukcia.org/wordpress/?p=1712

[keg]

Thing is, you don't know what effect it will have until you try it. If it sends you bonkers it's a bit late...

[Piebob]

before it was legislated against it was legal

...and widely advertised

 

[overandunder2012]

...and widely advertised

 

the dentists in the uk used to use it

[Pheasant Feeder]

An old mate who was a police constable in the very early 70's stopped a vehicle in 1973, smelled cannabis and found a small amount of cannabis resin. This back then was a major event, CID came to see him and the driver got 3 years imprisonment.

Now 40 years later the same circumstances results in a street caution. That's why the war on drugs has been lost.

 

Having never dabbled in drugs I know very little about their effects, but there does seem to be a greater level of mental illness about these days. I wonder if a survey of people with mental illness would reveal a correlation of how many have used drugs in their past.

 

One of the reasons I've never seriously considered being a paramedic is that I would have no interest in treating drug addicts when they overdose, and would feel frustrated that my time and resources could be better spent helping people who genuinely deserve help. I personally view it as natural selection.

 

As you can probably guess I am against drugs and their legalisation.

[Chris Bb]

Having read this thread I'm now truly in a quandary.

 

My initial feeling was that legalising drugs would stop the theft, etc. carried out by users to pay for their habit.

 

I do believe that trafficers are akin to murderers, they take lives and should pay the ultimate penalty.

 

However, I can also see that we don't want legalised addicts wandering the streets in ever increasing numbers.

 

There needs to be a middle ground where victims (addicts/users) are not dependent upon the evil trafficers but where we don't encourage the use of such addictive drugs.

 

And if I knew the answer I'd be God or Prime Minister (not, I suspect, that he knows the answer either).

[tigger]

We could all end up like this haha http://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=a96Cyf2kLi8

[henry d]

A few side topics have surfaced concerning cannabis and the results from the US where some de-criminalisation through medicinal use has shown that there is a lot of illegal use around the fringes and as a result young people are using high THC cannabis and are becoming addicted. They are now planning to legalise it in Colorado, the companies are already ahead of the game and have gone into production of all things cannabis and most of it will knock you into a semi-coma. There was a BBC 2 documentary recently showing this "America` stoned kids" and may be available on BBC iplayer, they have chocolates with the same THC level as, iirc, 12 doses of skunk. How irresponsible is that of suppliers? What if a kid got hold of it? It is not just chocolates, a whole range of canned drinks and sweets are available too.

 

Some interesting ideas guys

[Reeceknight]

Afro man didn't help really did he with his song lol

 

[Penelope]

So did Queen Victoria.

 

the dentists in the uk used to use it

[Mungler]

A few side topics have surfaced concerning cannabis and the results from the US where some de-criminalisation through medicinal use has shown that there is a lot of illegal use around the fringes and as a result young people are using high THC cannabis and are becoming addicted. They are now planning to legalise it in Colorado, the companies are already ahead of the game and have gone into production of all things cannabis and most of it will knock you into a semi-coma. There was a BBC 2 documentary recently showing this "America` stoned kids" and may be available on BBC iplayer, they have chocolates with the same THC level as, iirc, 12 doses of skunk. How irresponsible is that of suppliers? What if a kid got hold of it? It is not just chocolates, a whole range of canned drinks and sweets are available too.

 

Some interesting ideas guys

 

 

It's an interesting one but I can't but help think that making it legal wouldn't make everyone zombies.

 

I could get tanked up on Special Brew every day, but I and most of the Country don't - I have a family, I have to go to work, I would be shunned, it's too expensive and I don't fancy drinking all the time like that - the usual bits of "life glue" that keeps us all on the straight and narrow.

 

That being said, I think a chunk of people do booze it up everyday / too much and for all everyone worries and wrings their hands about cannabis I think they should deal with alcohol abuse first and foremost as something a great deal more dangerous and anti social.

[overandunder2012]

Afro man didn't help really did he with his song lol

 

that was so funny it got to number 1 in many countries well you got to have a sense of humor about these things

Edited October 3, 2013 by overandunder2012

[overandunder2012]

 

 

I could get tanked up on Special Brew every day, but I and most of the Country don't

why would it be any different for smokers? i still cant see it being worse than it is now, when in amsterdam where its obvious whats going on i felt it was a far more civilized way to deal with it, the smokers do their thing in cafes and the rest of us get on with our day and i bet less teenagers smoke it in amsterdam than in london because it takes the "big i am gangster because i got drugs" out of it because its not big or clever there anyone can do it if they choose or not as the case maybe. if you cant stop people using drugs then drug education is the key not criminalization i think

Edited October 3, 2013 by overandunder2012

[JonathanL]

Any discussion like this has to start from the position that an adult has the right to do whatever he pleases, whenever he wants, as long as it doesn't cause an unreasonable detriment to others. The point of discussion, then, is at what point you decide that the individual's actions become unreasonably detrimental.

 

With drugs like Cannabis I don't see any great detriment. Yes, some people may drive whilst affected by it but that's true of any substance. It's still an offence though. Other than driving or operating heavy machinery there is really very little risk of harm to anyone else. Cannabis use is far, far less likely to have violent results than alcohol use. For the user, and others, it probably carries the same risk as smoking tobacco but that is the users choice and third parties are protected by no-smoking regulations in public places these days.

 

I don't accept the notion that decriminalising things will result in a nation awash with people permanently stoned are wasted on herion and cocaine. Alcohol, even in very high concentrations, is easily available to anyone who wants it but few people spend their whole lives ratted out their brains on it.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

I think the difference with prohibition was the goverment took something that was legal and made it illegal

 

Plus a vast majority of the population at the time drank alchohol

 

Heroin and Opiates were legal here at one time. Heroin was supplied in medical packs to soldiers in the First World War and cocaine based medicines could be purchased at chemists and department stores up until the 1930's - Heroin as well, I think. Until the early 1970's doctors could prescribe heroin to addicts. LSD could be freely bought, sold and possessed by anyone up until the late 60's. Ecstacy wasn't banned until the late 80's, I believe.

 

J.

[JonathanL]

Cannabis should be made legal,not harder drugs. Alcohol is far worse than weed. I have known and know a lot of people who smoke it none of them are rageing physco's or gangsters going round popping caps in peoples ***** as some peoples blinkered views seem to say. But there are a hell of a lot mild mannered people out there that turn in to lunatics when they drink alcohol. Not sure the government would make much money out of it though because it would be cheaper to grow it yourself.

 

Who would bother though? I'm sure a few hobbyists would but not many as it's time consuming and requires space and equipment. It's much easier and much, much cheaper to make home brew booze but only a few do. A cigarette smoker could grow their own tobacco but does anyone actually do it?

 

J.

[Penelope]

The British also supplied China and India with opium.

 

 

Heroin and Opiates were legal here at one time. Heroin was supplied in medical packs to soldiers in the First World War and cocaine based medicines could be purchased at chemists and department stores up until the 1930's - Heroin as well, I think. Until the early 1970's doctors could prescribe heroin to addicts. LSD could be freely bought, sold and possessed by anyone up until the late 60's. Ecstacy wasn't banned until the late 80's, I believe.

 

J.

[shootnfish]

Jonathan l... If you only want to grow a couple of plants for personal use you don't need loads of equipment and time . You don't even need a greenhouse. There are loads of different types of plant ones that if you plant at the right time grow well outside ,dwarf plants that you can grow indoors all sorts. You only need all the equipment if your growing it on a large scale. Loads of people grow it for personal as its cheaper than buying it. And in sure it would be a lot less expensive than what the government would be selling it for.