Police Interceptors - Channel5

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, Vince Green said:

They will never legalise cannabis because it keeps thousands of low grade criminals employed in something which, although illegal, is totally invisible to Mr Joe Public.

It doesn't impact on society in the same way as burglary muggings or breaking into cars would. If you take away the drug dealers present source of income what would they be doing as an alternative? 

Big corporations with a whisper in a politicians ear (or a hand into their pocket) will likely have far more influence over legislation than small time drug dealers. 

[12gauge82]

Something which I don' think has been mentioned yet (apologies if it has as I haven't read every single post).

People who grow drugs are very likely to have contact with very dodgy people or at least have a friend of a friend ect, if word gets out they're growing drugs they are far more likely to have a visit from some not very nice people who may also decide to take a gun if they happen across one looking for a drug stash, equally the police would take the view that a drug grower might use a gun to defend themselves from unwanted drug thieves and therefore I wholeheartedly agree anyone growing drugs is unfit to hold a gun licence.

[Twistedsanity]

The rothschilds and Bayer have their fingers in many "legal" skunk farms all over this country hidden in plain sight and licenced by the government, they grow tons of skunk and extract the two main chemicals thc and cbd and bottle them up for sale to the global market holding at last count 13 global patents on a plant that we are told has no medical necessity defence in law if you were to get caught, packaged up its called sativex and sells for about £125 for a tiny bottle, they aren't about to see all their hard work and profits taken away by allowing cannabis to be legalised anytime soon 

[Vince Green]

51 minutes ago, Bazooka Joe said:

Yes it does Vince, they do exactly that to fund their habit, shoplifting must be No-1.

Not so much at the cannabis level. 

[grrclark]

3 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Something which I don' think has been mentioned yet (apologies if it has as I haven't read every single post).

People who grow drugs are very likely to have contact with very dodgy people or at least have a friend of a friend ect, if word gets out they're growing drugs they are far more likely to have a visit from some not very nice people who may also decide to take a gun if they happen across one looking for a drug stash, equally the police would take the view that a drug grower might use a gun to defend themselves from unwanted drug thieves and therefore I wholeheartedly agree anyone growing drugs is unfit to hold a gun licence.

How on earth do you get to that conclusion?

I rather suspect that you significantly underestimate the number of home growers in the UK and the tiny scale of their home production.

8 minutes ago, Twistedsanity said:

The rothschilds and Bayer have their fingers in many "legal" skunk farms all over this country hidden in plain sight and licenced by the government, they grow tons of skunk and extract the two main chemicals thc and cbd and bottle them up for sale to the global market holding at last count 13 global patents on a plant that we are told has no medical necessity defence in law if you were to get caught, packaged up its called sativex and sells for about £125 for a tiny bottle, they aren't about to see all their hard work and profits taken away by allowing cannabis to be legalised anytime soon 

The Rothschilds and Bayer?  Sativex was developed by GW Pharmaceuticals and so far as I can see they are under their own Nasdaq listing and that product is sold as a specific therapy for MS in 30 odd countries.  

If cannabis is legalised in the UK, and it will happen, then the pharma' companies have an instant massive expansion in their available market and are not limited to trying to knock out a couple of specific products.  The estimated medical cannabis global market size is estimated to be something like $20bn, of which the UK is tiny.

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, grrclark said:

How on earth do you get to that conclusion?

I rather suspect that you significantly underestimate the number of home growers in the UK and the tiny scale of their home production.

The Rothschilds and Bayer?  Sativex was developed by GW Pharmaceuticals and so far as I can see they are under their own Nasdaq listing and that product is sold as a specific therapy for MS in 30 odd countries.  

If cannabis is legalised in the UK, and it will happen, then the pharma' companies have an instant massive expansion in their available market and are not limited to trying to knock out a couple of specific products.  The estimated medical cannabis global market size is estimated to be something like $20bn, of which the UK is tiny.

It's a fact, a large number of growers will at some point down the line whether through a friend of a friend have links to serious criminals, if they are selling it's even worse as they will be a target of not very nice people who may come looking for their stash.

I don' think those who grow for their own personal use should be demonised but anyone selling to others is posing a risk and could be responsible for ultimately putting firearms in the hands of dangerous criminals.

[keg]

29 minutes ago, Twistedsanity said:

The rothschilds and Bayer have their fingers in many "legal" skunk farms all over this country hidden in plain sight and licenced by the government, they grow tons of skunk and extract the two main chemicals thc and cbd and bottle them up for sale to the global market holding at last count 13 global patents on a plant that we are told has no medical necessity defence in law if you were to get caught, packaged up its called sativex and sells for about £125 for a tiny bottle, they aren't about to see all their hard work and profits taken away by allowing cannabis to be legalised anytime soon 

Where is the evidence of this please?

[Vince Green]

When you go to Amsterdam there are dozens of shops selling cannabis seeds and apparently (rather bizarrely IMO) it is not illegal to bring seeds back into this country. Now work out how many seeds each one of those shops has to sell every week to pay the rent and be a viable business. Then multiply that by the number of shops and it equates to one heck of a lot of seeds.

Somebody is growing a lot of cannabis somewhere

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, keg said:

Where is the evidence of this please?

Experiance.

[keg]

So no actual evidence? 

[12gauge82]

He is an excrepict of a 2014 study conducted by the police, there' plenty more evidence out there.

I'm not saying everyone is involved but if the police were to allow drug users access to firearms we'd start seeing alot more legally held guns used in crimes and the swift banning of our sport.

Key Findings
 Evidence indicates that there is a continued link between commercial cultivation, modern slavery 
and people living without legal permission to remain in the UK, including the exploitation of 
vulnerable adults and children. 
 OCGs involved in cannabis supply are frequently involved in the supply of other drugs, hence 
cannabis users risk being persuaded into the use of other class A drugs. 
 Increased violence has been attributed to those involved in the cultivation of cannabis, including 
aggravated burglaries and ‘taxation’ of rival gangs. Risks at sites being used for cultivation of 
cannabis could include improvised traps installed to protect the plants. 
 The majority of identified offenders are white British men aged between 25 and 34 years of age. 
Whilst crime data continues to show a decline in activity among South East Asian offenders and 
OCGs, intelligence returns confirm they still play a significant role in the cultivation of cannabis. 
Reports suggest a new trend of cultivation sites being controlled by white British OCGs, which 
employ Vietnamese nationals who are forced to work in cultivation.
 The size of commercial cultivation sites continues to be predominantly small and located in 
residential dwellings, with offenders controlling a number of sites, often across large geographical 
areas. 
 There is a potential increased risk of fires associated with small cultivation sites.
 The average number of plants recovered per annum over the three year period was just over a 
quarter of a million with 2013/14 recording the highest at 276,676.
 The number of commercial cultivation cannabis offences has decreased by 5.6 per cent in 2013/14 
when compared with the previous year. This also follows a decrease of 3.7 per cent between 
2011/12 and 2012/13. 
 Law enforcement continues to tackle the scale of commercial cultivation of cannabis at a local, 
regional and national level, concentrating on the threat, risk and harm posed.

[grrclark]

15 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

It's a fact, a large number of growers will at some point down the line whether through a friend of a friend have links to serious criminals, if they are selling it's even worse as they will be a target of not very nice people who may come looking for their stash.

I don' think those who grow for their own personal use should be demonised but anyone selling to others is posing a risk and could be responsible for ultimately putting firearms in the hands of dangerous criminals.

Can you cite a reference please if it is factual.

[12gauge82]

Just now, grrclark said:

Can you cite a reference please if it is factual.

See above

[grrclark]

12 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

When you go to Amsterdam there are dozens of shops selling cannabis seeds and apparently (rather bizarrely IMO) it is not illegal to bring seeds back into this country. Now work out how many seeds each one of those shops has to sell every week to pay the rent and be a viable business. Then multiply that by the number of shops and it equates to one heck of a lot of seeds.

Somebody is growing a lot of cannabis somewhere

Indeed, even a simple google search for hydroponics and growing equipment will give an indication of the scale in the UK.  In my small town, 20,000 people, there are two grow shops that operate out of small commercial units.  What market are they serving I wonder.

2 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

See above

Nothing in that collection of statements constitutes any sort of factual evidence to back up your claims.  They are headline statements that refer to a specific piece of work and without understanding what the parameters of that study were it is all rather meaningless.

100% of criminals drank milk in their lifetime.  That is an absolutely indisputable fact, it means absolutely nothing of course in the context of the discussion, but don't let that stop us using it.

[motty]

17 hours ago, Davyo said:

To the point that i surrendered mine due to compromisation he started to cause.What starts off as recreational use doesnt stay recreational for long.

 These muppets arnt peddling the canabis of the 60/70's these days mate .I could well reconcil with the recreational use years back as people could take it or leave it.

SORRY to everyone if i sounded a bit bitter,but i wouldnt wish what ive been through on anybody.

What starts off as recreational use doesnt stay recreational for long.

 

Just a bit of a generalisation, wouldn't you agree?

[12gauge82]

7 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Indeed, even a simple google search for hydroponics and growing equipment will give an indication of the scale in the UK.  In my small town, 20,000 people, there are two grow shops that operate out of small commercial units.  What market are they serving I wonder.

Nothing in that collection of statements constitutes any sort of factual evidence to back up your claims.  They are headline statements that refer to a specific piece of work and without understanding what the parameters of that study were it is all rather meaningless.

100% of criminals drank milk in their lifetime.  That is an absolutely indisputable fact, it means absolutely nothing of course in the context of the discussion, but don't let that stop us using it.

It clearly doesn't sit with your own personal views but it is a factual study by police intelligence and arrest data conducted in 2014, I don' know how it could be any more factual.

[motty]

Quote - "As cannabis is currently illegal in the UK, therefore any known users wouldn't get a licence."

I know someone who was a known user of cannabis when his certificate was granted.

Edited January 9, 2018 by motty

[grrclark]

2 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

It clearly doesn't sit with your own personal views but it is a factual study by police intelligence and arrest data conducted in 2014, I don' know how it could be any more factual.

 

29 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

It's a fact, a large number of growers will at some point down the line whether through a friend of a friend have links to serious criminals, if they are selling it's even worse as they will be a target of not very nice people who may come looking for their stash.

I don' think those who grow for their own personal use should be demonised but anyone selling to others is posing a risk and could be responsible for ultimately putting firearms in the hands of dangerous criminals.

It's not about it sitting with my own personal views, it is about misrepresentation.

Where in that list of statement that you provided is there anything that can wholly substantiate your post that I have highlighted?

[Danger-Mouse]

17 hours ago, Davyo said:

Do people seriously think its acceptable for a cert holder to be a 'recreational drug user'

As stated elsewhere there are plenty of people who enjoy a few beers or whatever their tipple of choice is. For the most part their usage is sensible and for those who run to excess then there is some possibility of their certificate being revoked.

The issue of the recreational drug user is debateable. If you are strictly viewing it on the fact that a cannabis smoker is breaking the law then arguably they will not be fit to hold a certificate (although as also covered in the thread the seriousness of the law that has been broken should and indeed is taken into account when issueing certificates.) However if the debate is whether a recreational drug user is capable of safely handling a gun then the majority of recreational smokers would be fine the folowing morning, probably more so than the hung over heavy drinker. Those that heavily use cannabis would probably be pretty safe simply because their tolerance and the fact they are so used to being stoned. Many people will unknowingly associate with heavy smokers without even realising they are in the company of such a user. It can be such a "normal" state that a person acts completely naturally.

 

17 hours ago, andrewluke said:

 

 

17 hours ago, andrewluke said:

i'd like to see a mouth swab drug test by the FEO for every application/renewal

swabs used by police

The law introduced in England and Wales two years ago set low limits for eight illegal drugs, including cannabis and cocaine, and higher levels for eight prescription drugs, including morphine and methadone.

I wouldn't. Besides which it would serve very little purpose. The applicant would know when the test was ocurring and could simply avoid any illegal substance for a suitable period of time.

Interestingly the drug that would require the longest period of abstinance would be marijuana which can stay within the human body for around 30 days. The more serious Class A drugs leave the system far more rapidly. The nice middle class person who snorts a couple of lines of coke on a Saturday night is probably going to pass the test after 24-48 hours. As this debate has included "degrees of crime" then surely this type of user is less deserving of a certificate than a marijuana smoker, simply because possession of a Class A substance is a more serious offence than possession of Cannabis, a Class B drug.

11 hours ago, Mungler said:

There’s a change in the law coming over the horizon driven by the decriminalisation of cannabis in Canada, the States, Spain, Holland (etc.) and a large chunk of supportive medical evidence.

I am relatively ambivalent - I think alcohol is the far more damaging and abused substance (just look in on any A&E at the weekend) but alcohol currently has greater social acceptance and tolerance.

However, if we all pause and put our copies of the Daily Mail away for one moment there is a strong economic case for the legalisation of cannabis - it would be *the* single biggest earner for the government (up there with the tax revenues currently enjoyed on cigarettes and alcohol) and I just don’t see a government struggling to fund the NHS likely to knock that opportunity back and at the same time they get to take a massive bite out of the black economy.

One of my chums in the plod called it a few years ago - he said once they have the road side testing bit off pat (prescribed limits, detection etc) then it’s coming.

I do love these threads though for the hysteria. Hysteria and anecdotal evidence; what better ways to stifle a debate.

Good post.

The prescribed limits and the accuracy of the tests are the key. USADA, the United States Anti Doping Agency have extraodinarily accurate tests for the detection of cannabis but such tests are no doubt much more expensive than the roadside tests used by the police

10 hours ago, ADT06 said:

 

I suppose there are 2 questions really:

• Is it ok to willingly break the law and own guns.
• Regardless of legality, does cannabis as a substance affect your capacity to be responsible when possessing or handling a firearm.

 

Well if it isn't then other than a few perfect saints on here the majority of us should probably hand over our guns. Most of us probably speed at some point.

See my earlier comments.

9 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

I rather think that like tobacco, I won't be participating.

 

9 hours ago, Mungler said:

Don’t worry, like smoking I don’t think they’ll make it mandatory.

not only do I think marijuana should be legalized. I think it should be mandatory. I’m a hard liner.

Think about it man, you get in traffic behind somebody. *Honks* *Honks* *Honks* *Honks* *Honks* *Honks* *Honks* *Honks*

Shut up and smoke that, it’s the law.

Oh, sorry. I was taking life seriously. Oh man, who’s hungry?

That’d be a nice world wouldn’t it? Quiet, mellow, hungry, high people everywhere. Just Domino’s pizza trucks passing each other. Every single highway, parades of Domino’s. *Horn Sound*

Let them get stuck in traffic, all our pizzas will be free.

[12gauge82]

1 minute ago, grrclark said:

 

It's not about it sitting with my own personal views, it is about misrepresentation.

Where in that list of statement that you provided is there anything that can wholly substantiate your post that I have highlighted?

I don't want to derail a thread by going back and fore over a set of facts.

I've given my view, I've backed it up with a small part of a study conducted by police over 3 years using arrest and intelligence reports, your welcome to ignore or disagree with it, but to my mind it remains a fact.

If the police were to allow those found growing cannabis to keep their gun licences, it wouldn't be long before hardened criminals were granted licences or very bad people got hold of guns, if that were to happen I'm sure everyone on here would agree that would be very bad for our sport and the wider public.

[grrclark]

2 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I don't want to derail a thread by going back and fore over a set of facts.

I've given my view, I've backed it up with a small part of a study conducted by police over 3 years using arrest and intelligence reports, your welcome to ignore or disagree with it, but to my mind it remains a fact.

If the police were to allow those found growing cannabis to keep their gun licences, it wouldn't be long before hardened criminals were granted licences or very bad people got hold of guns, if that were to happen I'm sure everyone on here would agree that would be very bad for our sport and the wider public.

No, you've not backed up your argument at all.  You are presenting an entirely specious argument and thinking that making reference to some headline statements that are largely made in respect to organised criminal gangs and using that as a broad brush sweeping statement for everyone who might grow a plant at home.

There is no danger of derailing this thread, it has moved around more than a balloon in the wind so indulge yourself.

In the highlighted part of your post you are at it again, how on earth can you justify that statement?

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, grrclark said:

No, you've not backed up your argument at all.  You are presenting an entirely specious argument and thinking that making reference to some headline statements that are largely made in respect to organised criminal gangs and using that as a broad brush sweeping statement for everyone who might grow a plant at home.

There is no danger of derailing this thread, it has moved around more than a balloon in the wind so indulge yourself.

In the highlighted part of your post you are at it again, how on earth can you justify that statement?

It's not headlines, it's a 3 year factual study, as for what bit of the report backs up my stateent that those involved in cannabis growing having links with bad people how about this "Increased violence has been attributed to those involved in the cultivation of cannabis, including 
aggravated burglaries and ‘taxation’ of rival gangs."

[SpringDon]

43 minutes ago, grrclark said:

Indeed, even a simple google search for hydroponics and growing equipment will give an indication of the scale in the UK.  In my small town, 20,000 people, there are two grow shops that operate out of small commercial units.  What market are they serving I wonder.

<snip>

Not to disagree with your main point. But the inference that hydroponics is somehow dodgy is massively unfair. There are many commercial strawberry and salad growers using it large scale. Domestically, orchid, salad and permaculture usage is common. Not every person who buys a sodium light should have their licence revoked.

[grrclark]

1 minute ago, SpringDon said:

Not to disagree with your main point. But the inference that hydroponics is somehow dodgy is massively unfair. There are many commercial strawberry and salad growers using it large scale. Domestically, orchid, salad and permaculture usage is common. Not every person who buys a sodium light should have their licence revoked.

I'm not suggesting they should either, but if you look at the product that are on offer for sale it is thinly disguised that much of that is for cannabis growing.

[100milesaway]

I have watched many of these type of programs and it has, at least  to me become obvious that the police do their best to get drugs off the streets but the courts hand out very soft penalties,ie small fines and community services and in the main the druggies are back at thieving,  stealing cars the very next day. IT most be soul destroying to chase crooks night after night to see them back in action the next day.WE are a soft society today without an ounce of back bone or bite, and what is worse is that these thugs are well aware that they will get let off.. from Auntie.

Edited January 9, 2018 by 100milesaway