Should cannabis be legal

[19SazzaLou91]

I'm unsure about legalising cannabis. I disagree with what certain people have been saying in that more people will smoke it, they won't. The whole country isn't sat trembling because they want a fix but can't because it's illegal. But, like others have said, where do we draw the line.

 

Granted, legalisation would mean better control over what goes in and out of the country, and what is IN the drug. And it would reduce crime rates BUT there would be no line to be drawn.

[anywebsite]

I'm unsure about legalising cannabis. I disagree with what certain people have been saying in that more people will smoke it, they won't. The whole country isn't sat trembling because they want a fix but can't because it's illegal. But, like others have said, where do we draw the line.

 

Granted, legalisation would mean better control over what goes in and out of the country, and what is IN the drug. And it would reduce crime rates BUT there would be no line to be drawn.

 

What line?

 

Politicians need to ban things that people enjoy doing, it gives them a feeling of power. It's no use banning something that nobody wants to do anyway, they don't feel like they've 'made a difference' then.

 

So they have to ban types of sex, drugs, drinking in pubs outside certain times, smoking indoors & other petty stuff.

[19SazzaLou91]

What line?

 

Politicians need to ban things that people enjoy doing, it gives them a feeling of power. It's no use banning something that nobody wants to do anyway, they don't feel like they've 'made a difference' then.

 

So they have to ban types of sex, drugs, drinking in pubs outside certain times, smoking indoors & other petty stuff.

 

Obviously you didn't understand what I said.

 

By legalising cannabis, where would politicians know when to stop. Heroin addicts will be crying out for heroin to be made legal, crack addicts for cocaine, etc.

[splodgeyAl]

Obviously you didn't understand what I said.

 

By legalising cannabis, where would politicians know when to stop. Heroin addicts will be crying out for heroin to be made legal, crack addicts for cocaine, etc.

As they should be. What business does the government have telling me what I am or am not allowed to ingest?

[Phanerothyme]

Obviously you didn't understand what I said.

 

By legalising cannabis, where would politicians know when to stop. Heroin addicts will be crying out for heroin to be made legal, crack addicts for cocaine, etc.

 

It's not [just] the addicts crying out for legalisation though. It's cops, lawyers, judges, probation officers and taxpayers too.

 

have a look at http://leap.cc

 

Cannabis is probably one of the most difficult drugs to legalise, and to be brutally honest, one of the least important on the list when it comes to reducing harm. It is a cash bonanza for criminal gangs, and that problem at least could be dealt with under a regime of regulation rather than prohibition.

 

But the amount of time and money and harm that could be saved by legalising heroin, and the comparative ease with which it could be done makes smack a priority for legalisation in my view.

 

The big picture shows that prohibition is the judicial equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la-la-la-la' as loudly as you can.

 

Any alternative to prohibition must (by definition) include legalisation, and it's models of legalisation and regulation that should be under question, not whether prohibition can be made to work.

 

For my money (and splodgey's) it revolves around a much more basic concept - the right to control your own state of mind.

 

Provided you don't harm anyone else (and thus rightfully fall within the purview of the justice system) what business is it of the state to decide how you may or may not modify your awareness?

[19SazzaLou91]

It's not [just] the addicts crying out for legalisation though. It's cops, lawyers, judges, probation officers and taxpayers too.

 

have a look at http://leap.cc

 

Cannabis is probably one of the most difficult drugs to legalise, and to be brutally honest, one of the least important on the list when it comes to reducing harm. It is a cash bonanza for criminal gangs, and that problem at least could be dealt with under a regime of regulation rather than prohibition.

 

But the amount of time and money and harm that could be saved by legalising heroin, and the comparative ease with which it could be done makes smack a priority for legalisation in my view.

 

The big picture shows that prohibition is the judicial equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la-la-la-la' as loudly as you can.

 

Any alternative to prohibition must (by definition) include legalisation, and it's models of legalisation and regulation that should be under question, not whether prohibition can be made to work.

 

For my money (and splodgey's) it revolves around a much more basic concept - the right to control your own state of mind.

 

Provided you don't harm anyone else (and thus rightfully fall within the purview of the justice system) what business is it of the state to decide how you may or may not modify your awareness?

 

I completely agree with what you say, but I personally am in two minds about legalisation of all drugs. It would be beneficial in the long run. I will admit, though, in the poll I am one of those who voted FOR it to be legalised.

[anywebsite]

Obviously you didn't understand what I said.

 

By legalising cannabis, where would politicians know when to stop. Heroin addicts will be crying out for heroin to be made legal, crack addicts for cocaine, etc.

 

So what? Maybe they'd stop stealing & causing lots of other crime to fund their habit then.

 

Would you start smoking crack because it was legal? Being illegal obviously doesn't stop those people that do want to smoke crack, it just makes it more expensive, more dangerous & funds criminal gangs.

 

I don't care if someone wants to shoot heroin if they aren't harming anyone else, it's the stealing to fund it that bothers me.

[splodgeyAl]

It's not [just] the addicts crying out for legalisation though. It's cops, lawyers, judges, probation officers and taxpayers too.

 

have a look at http://leap.cc

 

Cannabis is probably one of the most difficult drugs to legalise, and to be brutally honest, one of the least important on the list when it comes to reducing harm. It is a cash bonanza for criminal gangs, and that problem at least could be dealt with under a regime of regulation rather than prohibition.

 

But the amount of time and money and harm that could be saved by legalising heroin, and the comparative ease with which it could be done makes smack a priority for legalisation in my view.

 

The big picture shows that prohibition is the judicial equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'la-la-la-la' as loudly as you can.

 

Any alternative to prohibition must (by definition) include legalisation, and it's models of legalisation and regulation that should be under question, not whether prohibition can be made to work.

 

For my money (and splodgey's) it revolves around a much more basic concept - the right to control your own state of mind.

 

Provided you don't harm anyone else (and thus rightfully fall within the purview of the justice system) what business is it of the state to decide how you may or may not modify your awareness?

Also, if people could stop being so concerned about what other people are doing to themselves, maybe we could start using hemp in place of or supplementary to:

- trees for paper / card / mdf,

- cotton for cloth,

- oil for plastics,

- oil for food

[19SazzaLou91]

So what? Maybe they'd stop stealing & causing lots of other crime to fund their habit then.

 

Would you start smoking crack because it was legal? Being illegal obviously doesn't stop those people that do want to smoke crack, it just makes it more expensive, more dangerous & funds criminal gangs.

 

I don't care if someone wants to shoot heroin if they aren't harming anyone else, it's the stealing to fund it that bothers me.

 

I already made the point earlier (if you would care to read my previous posts) that I disagree that more people would take the drug just because it is available.

 

I also said that I voted for cannabis to be made legal.

And I never said I was worried about what people were putting into their bodies, and wanted to stop them. All I said was the government would be UNLIKELY to legalise harder drugs, but they would have to in order to make it fair and just.

[splodgeyAl]

I already made the point earlier (if you would care to read my previous posts) that I disagree that more people would take the drug just because it is available.

 

I also said that I voted for cannabis to be made legal.

And I never said I was worried about what people were putting into their bodies, and wanted to stop them. All I said was the government would be UNLIKELY to legalise harder drugs, but they would have to in order to make it fair and just.

Interestingly, opium was criminalised sometime after the British establishment lost control of the trade.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7460682.stm