Jump to content

Why not allow people to grow their own cannabis for a small fee?


Recommended Posts

So some people are bigger idiots than others. I recall a petrol tanker driver getting arrested for smoking dope at the wheel.

 

What sort of excuse is stupidity for legalising a drug?

 

No one's using that as an excuse at all, that driver was doing something very stupid, dangerous and illegal, just like if he were drinking alcohol at the wheel.

 

No cannabis users I know of would advocate smoking whilst driving a petrol tanker, what is your point with this one?

 

EDIT: This just confirms the point made in my last post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand your point. There will always be a market for drugs. You're arguing from the hypothesis that everyone must stop, which isn't going to happen.

 

To argue this then you are logically correct, for if nobody bought drugs then there would be no money in selling them. This is very true. In practice though that is never going to happen.

 

An argument (one expressed on this thread) is that the crime would stop if the drugs were legalised.

I simply suggested drug users should, if that is their argument, abstain until it is legal.

The crime would then stop and they could campaign for legalising whatever they want but there would be no crime while they got their way.

 

Their argument of legalisation stopping crime is crap because the sort of idiots who use drugs will still break the law to get drug money if they can't get it through working and many countries won't be legalising in your lifetime so the crime will remain anyway.

 

Unless you're happy with the Taliban killing British troops with money made from your weed smoking.

I wouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An argument (one expressed on this thread) is that the crime would stop if the drugs were legalised.

I simply suggested drug users should, if that is their argument, abstain until it is legal.

Changing the law is a practical solution though. Getting everyone to abstain isn't. The first could happen, and the consequences that follow could be regulated. Your option couldn't happen, so there is very little point in considering it.

 

Their argument of legalisation stopping crime is crap because the sort of idiots who use drugs will still break the law to get drug money if they can't get it through working

That is addiction, which is a seperate issue. Helping addicts is something that needs to change regardless of the law, and I'd guess that 99.99% of drug related crime is due to addiction to opiates. Very few people steal to buy weed.

 

Unless you're happy with the Taliban killing British troops with money made from your weed smoking.

Emotive and illogical. Afghanistan grows poppies, and that trade is equally as bad now that it is under western rule than it was under the Taliban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An argument (one expressed on this thread) is that the crime would stop if the drugs were legalised.

I simply suggested drug users should, if that is their argument, abstain until it is legal.

The crime would then stop and they could campaign for legalising whatever they want but there would be no crime while they got their way.

 

Their argument of legalisation stopping crime is crap because the sort of idiots who use drugs will still break the law to get drug money if they can't get it through working and many countries won't be legalising in your lifetime so the crime will remain anyway.

 

Unless you're happy with the Taliban killing British troops with money made from your weed smoking.

I wouldn't be.

 

Are you suggesting that people growing at home finance the Taliban? :huh:

 

That's what this thread is about, home growing. As far as I was aware, Afghanistan is/was responsible for much of the hashish (the compressed "solid" form of trichotes from the plant) but I've not seen anything resembling that for years now. About 10-12 years ago the quality of hashish available took a severe tumble, as far as I'm concerned the stuff you can get these days is like poison- cut with boot polish, plastics, rubber and even dog turd :o

If anything this is more of a reason for legalisation.

 

EDIT: Your statement that I highlighted is another reason for legalising home growing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An argument (one expressed on this thread) is that the crime would stop if the drugs were legalised.

I simply suggested drug users should, if that is their argument, abstain until it is legal.

The crime would then stop and they could campaign for legalising whatever they want but there would be no crime while they got their way.

 

Their argument of legalisation stopping crime is crap because the sort of idiots who use drugs will still break the law to get drug money if they can't get it through working and many countries won't be legalising in your lifetime so the crime will remain anyway.

 

Unless you're happy with the Taliban killing British troops with money made from your weed smoking.

I wouldn't be.

 

 

ha ha ha ha ha ****ing hell taliban ****ing hell thats genius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non crime?

 

What about the crimes so that idiots without a real life can get off their heads.

How many car stereos are stolen by the little sods to buy weed?

 

I keep being told it doesn't happen but I know a lot of people who are short of a car stereo who would argue with you.

 

Moving on - If a light drug is legalised, why not the next one up the tree and so on?

 

You, apart from those with a genuine medical need, have to be a bit weak in the head to want to bother with drugs.

 

Keep it illegal and hand down harsh punishments including losing their house.

 

That's an interesting notion. To start why don't we take a look at this tree. It can be found in Professor Nutt's et al paper Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse published in the Lancet in 2007 (The Lancet 2007; 369: 1047–53).

You will not be able to access without paying but the nuts and balls can be found here (particularly the graph on page 10)

http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus1714/Estimating_drug_harms.pdf

... the graph can also be seen it all its technicolour glory here

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=129226

 

So, looking at this graph and taking alcohol as the benchmark of which drugs should be legal due to their relative harms then all of the following should also be legal as they are less harmful than alcolhol (with harm decreasing down the list).

Ketamine

Benzodiazepines

Amphetamine

Tobacco

Buprenorphine

Cannabis

Solvents

4-MTA

LSD

Methylphenidate

Anabolic steroids

GHB

Ecstasy

Alkyl nitrates

Khat

 

jb

 

ETA: Actually you can register for free and access the paper here http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2807%2960464-4/fulltext?_eventId=login

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.