Why ban smoking drugs IF..

[Phanerothyme]

UN: Afghanistan is leading hashish producer.

 

But a very small amount of it ends up in the UK, where the vast majority of cannabis consumed is domestically produced.

 

Also - can you clean up your post a bit, you've just pasted in a copy of a whole page without writing much yourself.

 

It looks lazy and slapdash.

[RootsBooster]

But a very small amount of it ends up in the UK, where the vast majority of cannabis consumed is domestically produced.

 

Also - can you clean up your post a bit, you've just pasted in a copy of a whole page without writing much yourself.

 

It looks lazy and slapdash.

 

And it's a decade-old news report, also another reason to legalise our own cannabis industry here (not to mention that it's Fox News)

[Cyclone]

Drug groups said it was clear proof of how cannabis, which no longer even carries an automatic police caution for possession since re-classification, can lead to a life of crime. Youngsters, once they are involved in a drugs culture, turn to crime to get the money to buy cannabis - including super-strength skunk. The drug also stops them caring about breaking the law.

 

Sounds like an argument to legalise and regulate it to me, whether the bit in bold is true or not (not I expect).

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 07:28 ----------

 

I'm not suggesting all who use illegal substances are all bad people and addicts it would be ludicrous to think that.

But when the habit gets out of control, as it can to those who become dependant; we have to interfere if we want to help them, so why avoid interfering before it reaches that point, especially if the potential addiction is going to also impede on the lives of those around them.

 

The same reason we avoid interfering when someone wants to buy a drink on a Friday night, we only interfere when alcohol becomes a problem for them.

You could make exactly the same argument about any number of legal and illegal drugs. To be consistent you have to have a consistent policy on all of them and the policy should be based on the level of harm that they cause.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 07:29 ----------

 

Here's a small sample for you.

 

Excellent. You know what the solution is to all those. Legalise it and regulate it.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 07:32 ----------

 

I am answering intelligently.

A) I don't drugs to enhance my life.

B) I rely on medical evidence that shows that Cannabis can and will damage your health.

C) cannabis can and does affect unborn babies.

 

All of which leads you to what conclusion? People shouldn't be allowed to do anything that can harm themselves or an unborn baby? That's smoking, and drinking immediately ruled out. And there's no end to the things that can harm yourself which are all legal...

 

Nobody has argued that cannabis isn't harmful. It's less harmful than other drugs that are perfectly legal though, and the level of harm is increased by keeping it illegal (that's the key point I think).

[angos]

Sounds like an argument to legalise and regulate it to me, whether the bit in bold is true or not (not I expect).

Alcohol is legal and crime associated with alcohol exceeds that of cannabis, legalise cannabis and more people are likely to use it and associated crime with increase.

 

 

Excellent. You know what the solution is to all those. Legalise it and regulate it.

There is lots of crime associated with the legal use of alcohol, so what makes you think crime associated with cannabis will decrease if its made legal.

[Halibut]

Alcohol is legal and crime associated with alcohol exceeds that of cannabis, legalise cannabis and more people are likely to use it and associated crime with increase.

 

 

There is lots of crime associated with the legal use of alcohol, so what makes you think crime associated with cannabis will decrease if its made legal.

 

The large body of evidence that shows that this is the likely outcome.

[angos]

The large body of evidence that shows that this is the likely outcome.

 

The only evidence I have seen says that it won't cut associated crime, so whats different about the use of cannabis and the use of alcohol, both of which lower people inhibitions and cause crime, increasing consumption of either will just increase associated crime.

[Bonzo77]

Alcohol is legal and crime associated with alcohol exceeds that of cannabis, legalise cannabis and more people are likely to use it and associated crime with increase.

 

 

There is lots of crime associated with the legal use of alcohol, so what makes you think crime associated with cannabis will decrease if its made legal.

 

Have you ever been stoned?? I don't know about you, but the last thing I want to do when I'm stoned is.......anything........... other than play my guitar and sip red wine.

 

There's a BIG difference between crime related to these two drugs.

 

There will always be petty crime associated with drugs. People get addicted and some people can't handle the affects (a minority).

 

However, the crime associated with the probation of drugs, not just cannabis, runs far, far deeper than petty crime and the odd drink driving death.

 

At the moment, the market is controlled by criminals. Criminals who fund terrorism and exploit helpless local people.

 

Legalisation may lead to a small increase in related crime, for a while. But, it will put the control of the market back into the right hands, which will save countless lives. The production of the drugs will be a legitimate business venture for the farmers etc.

 

I think anyone who is totally for prohibition and thinks the war on drugs should continue needs to look at the bigger picture and stop being so selfish!

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 08:20 ----------

 

There are many good programs on this subject. But, I still think this one is one of the best.

 

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/our-drugs-war

[angos]

Have you ever been stoned?? I don't know about you, but the last thing I want to do when I'm stoned is.......anything........... other than play my guitar and sip red wine.

 

There's a BIG difference between crime related to these two drugs.

 

There will always be petty crime associated with drugs. People get addicted and some people can't handle the affects (a minority).

 

However, the crime associated with the probation of drugs, not just cannabis, runs far, far deeper than petty crime and the odd drink driving death.

 

At the moment, the market is controlled by criminals. Criminals who fund terrorism and exploit helpless local people.

 

Legalisation may lead to a small increase in related crime, for a while. But, it will put the control of the market back into the right hands, which will save countless lives. The production of the drugs will be a legitimate business venture for the farmers etc.

 

I think anyone who is totally for prohibition and thinks the war on drugs should continue needs to look at the bigger picture and stop being so selfish!

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 08:20 ----------

 

There are many good programs on this subject. But, I still think this one is one of the best.

 

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/our-drugs-war

 

Cigarettes are legal yet criminal gangs counterfeit and sell them.

 

Criminal gangs won't just disappear because you legalese cannabis, they will just find another way of making money illegally.

[Cyclone]

The profit potential will be massively reduced though, and the majority of people who wanted to use the drug would buy it from a licensed place, so whilst a few criminals might persist, most would stop (stop dealing cannabis at least).

You don't find organised criminals selling beer on street corners after all.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 08:36 ----------

 

The only evidence I have seen says that it won't cut associated crime, so whats different about the use of cannabis and the use of alcohol, both of which lower people inhibitions and cause crime, increasing consumption of either will just increase associated crime.

 

Here you go, let me correct that;

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/legalising-and-taxing-cannabis-could-help-cut-the-deficit-by-125bn-claims-study-8817710.html

 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/media2.htm

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

 

I could go on, but that should be sufficient to change your opinion if evidence is at all important to you.

 

It's not some sort of pot head joke, it's widely studied and widely understood that decriminalisation saves lives and money, reduces crime and generally has far more positive affects than negative.

Those who deny this are arguing against an overwhelming amount of evidence and seem to base their opinion on "drugs are bad m'kay", without even really considering what that means.

[angos]

 

Here you go, let me correct that;

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/legalising-and-taxing-cannabis-could-help-cut-the-deficit-by-125bn-claims-study-8817710.html

 

I haven't argued that the government could make money by taxing it. But this is a bit of a concern don't you think.

It is likely that consumption could rise significantly as a consequence of the switch to legal status and the lower price that results, it said.

 

What will the cost to the NHS be as consumption increases.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 08:52 ----------

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

 

.

Fortunately, we have a real-world example of the actual effects of ending the violent, expensive War on Drugs and replacing it with a system of treatment for problem users and addicts.

 

Treatment would appear to be the reason crime fell, and not just making it legal.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 09:00 ----------

 

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/media2.htm

 

 

Legalizing drugs would not be cost free. We could expect somewhat more use of presently illicit drugs and, all other things remaining the same, more drug abuse.

 

So again its not the legalisation of drugs that will cut crime, consumption and the hill effects of drug use, it is treatment and encouraging people to stop using them.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 09:01 ----------

 

The profit potential will be massively reduced though, and the majority of people who wanted to use the drug would buy it from a licensed place, so whilst a few criminals might persist, most would stop (stop dealing cannabis at least).

You don't find organised criminals selling beer on street corners after all.

 

Criminal gangs smuggle and sell alcohol and cigarettes, they can both be bought legally yet many people choose to buy from criminals.

 

---------- Post added 25-10-2013 at 09:03 ----------

 

It's not some sort of pot head joke, it's widely studied and widely understood that decriminalisation saves lives and money, reduces crime and generally has far more positive affects than negative.

Those who deny this are arguing against an overwhelming amount of evidence and seem to base their opinion on "drugs are bad m'kay", without even really considering what that means.

 

All the links you supplied claim they are bad, why else would people using them need treatment.