BrightonLiveWire
BrightonLiveWire
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?





 All Forums
 News
 National News
 Legalzie and controll cannabis.
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Topic
Page: of 3

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 24/07/2007 :  10:25:08  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

I agree that there is a case for 'medicinal' licensing.



Yes so we don't have the shamefull situation whereby those who supply cannibis to suffers of MS and form networks of support risk prosecution.
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  09:24:31  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
“a consistent association between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms, including disabling psychotic disorders”.

here

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

Cunningham
Alagaësía



11 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  11:22:08  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
"They admit that they cannot be certain that the association means that there is a simple cause and effect"

Aquarius is a miscellaneous set of stars all at different distances from us, which have no connection with each other except that they constitute a (meaningless) pattern when seen from a certain (not particularly special) place in the galaxy (here).
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  11:37:42  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
True which is why they stated that there is a consistent association ... Having said that, they have used a fairly extensive, though far from exhaustive, sample spanning as it does a number of countries and 35 separate studies.

That coupled with the, purely anecdotal admittedly, evidence would lead one to at least treat the whole matter with some trepidation.

Madame Curie, famed for her work on radio-activity died from leukaemia. Her husband, prior to his untimely demise brought about by an accident, was showing signs of what we now know to be radiation poisoning. Marie's papers are stored in lead lined boxes (as are her cookbooks it transpires) and protective clothing needs to be worn in order to view the actual papers to this day.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

No Expert
Barsoom



448 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  14:06:42  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
*looks at thread title*

Has it been proven that canabis can damage the part of the brain related to spelling?
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  14:08:19  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
No fair No Expert ... Moon has repeatedly told us that he has an issue with spelling.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

No Expert
Barsoom



448 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  14:21:21  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
See, i've been smoking...
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  14:24:27  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Go to Top of Page

long time no see
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6771 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  18:59:15  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Drugs like Cannabis
will be Illegal Forever.

No way would anyone change the Laws
in a big way.
Go to Top of Page

Daveb
Earthsea



2420 Posts

Posted - 27/07/2007 :  19:34:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
We do not think it causes Schizophrenia

We're all doomed!
Head for the hills before they start heading for you!
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  11:22:39  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

quote:
“a consistent association between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms, including disabling psychotic disorders”.

here



The risk of developing any illness is still very low even for regular users although with everything fun in life there is normally some risk involved.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/jul/28/drugs.drugsandalcohol
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  11:26:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moon23

The risk of developing any illness is still very low even for regular users although with everything fun in life there is normally some risk involved.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/jul/28/drugs.drugsandalcohol

maybe ... but the risk is there Moon. Actually looking at it, the risks are slightly higher then the risks of developing lung cancer by passive smoking ....

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  11:37:05  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

quote:
Originally posted by moon23

The risk of developing any illness is still very low even for regular users although with everything fun in life there is normally some risk involved.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/jul/28/drugs.drugsandalcohol

maybe ... but the risk is there Moon. Actually looking at it, the risks are slightly higher then the risks of developing lung cancer by passive smoking ....



What's the relevance of this though? I'm talking about the risk an adult chooses to accept in partaking in something they enjoy and you're comparing it to a risk that someone subjects another person to without their consent.

What worries me is that the government also isn't able to make this distinction and is now going to start legislating to prevent indivduals from indulging in pleasurable risks.
Go to Top of Page

The Duke of Uranus
Barsoom



296 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  11:52:12  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
What's the relevance of this though? I'm talking about the risk an adult chooses to accept in partaking in something they enjoy and you're comparing it to a risk that someone subjects another person to without their consent.


The cost to the nhs is highly relevant i would have thought.

quote:
What worries me is that the government also isn't able to make this distinction and is now going to start legislating to prevent indivduals from indulging in pleasurable risks.


And when that risk affects others in society why shouldn't they? The problem is moon that you're happy to have the government intervene when it suits you but fail to see the bigger picture, an attitude which is naive at best. Our government has gradually been given a big green light to interfere in all aspects of our lives all in the name of protection.
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  11:56:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

No fair No Expert ... Moon has repeatedly told us that he has an issue with spelling.



I don't mind the fact that No Expert is taking the piss out of someone with a disabilty. It's the quality of his jokes that makes them offensive.
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  12:02:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke of Uranus

quote:
What's the relevance of this though? I'm talking about the risk an adult chooses to accept in partaking in something they enjoy and you're comparing it to a risk that someone subjects another person to without their consent.


The cost to the nhs is highly relevant i would have thought.

quote:
What worries me is that the government also isn't able to make this distinction and is now going to start legislating to prevent indivduals from indulging in pleasurable risks.


And when that risk affects others in society why shouldn't they? The problem is moon that you're happy to have the government intervene when it suits you but fail to see the bigger picture, an attitude which is naive at best. Our government has gradually been given a big green light to interfere in all aspects of our lives all in the name of protection.



I said before in the smoking post that I was worried that the government would smell blood over the smoking ban and move onto other things. I think their recent hardline on alcohol shows this might be coming true.

I'm also thinking that perhaps if things got any worse then it would be preferable for smokers to mass revolt to scare the government, despite the fact that I support the ban in principle. I should have had more foresight in predicting the governments behavior after the ban but I was too focused on the issue at hand.

Yes there is a problem with the NHS and the under funding of mental healthcare. However just imagine how much money could be spent on providing decent treatment and therapy if the cannabis trade was taxed and regulated.






Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  12:03:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke of Uranus

The problem is moon that you're happy to have the government intervene when it suits you but fail to see the bigger picture, an attitude which is naive at best. Our government has gradually been given a big green light to interfere in all aspects of our lives all in the name of protection.

Years ago when I was little my grandmother told me that 95% of mankind are stupid. It is only when seeing the inconsistencies highlighted by myopic self-servers that the strength of her argument comes home to me.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

nightbird
Calaspia



603 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  12:16:17  Show Profile  Send nightbird an AOL message  Reply with Quote
Freedom, the freedom to choose providing it doesn't harm or damage others.
Thats what its about, but its so much easier to take a puritan stance...
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  12:17:25  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

quote:
Originally posted by The Duke of Uranus

The problem is moon that you're happy to have the government intervene when it suits you but fail to see the bigger picture, an attitude which is naive at best. Our government has gradually been given a big green light to interfere in all aspects of our lives all in the name of protection.

Years ago when I was little my grandmother told me that 95% of mankind are stupid. It is only when seeing the inconsistencies highlighted by myopic self-servers that the strength of her argument comes home to me.



There is actually a philosophical differance between state intervention to protect indivduals from their selves and state internvention to protect indivduals from other indivduals.

What I failed to anticipate was the extent to which the government is able to use the same argument for both instances. However it seems there are plenty of people on this forum who were unable to grasp the differeance.

It is interesting to note that in the recent government response to an e-petition to legalize cannabis they sited protecting people's human rights as one reason to keep it outlawed. e.g. they have a duty to protect us from ourselves.

Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  12:19:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by nightbird

Freedom, the freedom to choose providing it doesn't harm or damage others.
Thats what its about, but its so much easier to take a puritan stance...



Yes [b]providing it doesn't harm or damage others[/b.. this is the bit which can sometimes be nebulous.

I mean does driving a car harm others? Lot's of things cause a little bit of harm to others if you consider global warming.
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  13:21:03  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moon23

What I failed to anticipate was the extent to which the government is able to use the same argument for both instances. However it seems there are plenty of people on this forum who were unable to grasp the differeance.


You did indeed fail to anticipate and that is far from a good philosophical habit

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  15:16:45  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

quote:
Originally posted by moon23

What I failed to anticipate was the extent to which the government is able to use the same argument for both instances. However it seems there are plenty of people on this forum who were unable to grasp the differeance.


You did indeed fail to anticipate and that is far from a good philosophical habit



Yes i'm better at looking rationally at the argument to hand rather than the social reactions of the populace as a living entity.
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  16:18:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moon23

Yes i'm better at looking rationally at the argument to hand rather than the social reactions of the populace as a living entity.

Except that you signally and consistently fail to show any ability to look at issues dispassionately and rationally I can find nothing to argue with in that statement.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  17:22:39  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Another point worth considering that is often missed is the extent to which cannabis illegality leads young people to become exposed to harder drugs.

For instance many drug dealers also sell other drugs and through having to go to these dealers to get cannabis people are often exposed to a 'drug taking' culture which has a different set of cultural and social norms. If cannabis was legal then it would be easier to make the distinction between soft and hard drugs.

In addition to the exposure to harder drugs the money spent on these drugs goes to someone who is not paying tax. They then give larger amounts of money to their supplier. A few people up the supply line and you will discover that the nice hippy dealer who sells the odd bit of weed is being supplied by an organized gang, the Mafia or organizations with links to arms dealing, human trafficking and terrorism. The governments solution to the problem e.g. prohibition has created an illegal black-market that contributes to organized crime and in all likelihood terrorism.


Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  17:28:30  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
What a load of emotive blackmail. Children and youngsters are always going to be more apt to influence. Would you have us cease all activites that aren't child friendly?

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

long time no see
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6771 Posts

Posted - 30/07/2007 :  20:47:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moon23

Another point worth considering





You must be in a DreamWorld,
None of this will Ever be made Legal.

Go live in Holland.
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 31/07/2007 :  11:13:49  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

What a load of emotive blackmail. Children and youngsters are always going to be more apt to influence. Would you have us cease all activites that aren't child friendly?



What's this go to do with ceasing all child unfriendly activities?

If cannabis wasn't illegal then people wouldn't have to go to drug dealers and get exposed to harder drugs. The fact is that the governments stance on the drug forces people who want to have the odd smoke to become exposed to harder drugs and underground criminal elements within society. It also forces millions of pounds that could go to towards the Treasury coffers into the hands of criminals.

Prohibition just turns drugs into more of a problem then they need be.

Saw a report in the Metro and air pollution causes 32,000 deaths a year in the UK. I don't see cars being re-classified though.

Double standards, you can drive a car that kills thousands through road deaths, air pollution and contribution to global warming. If you want to smoke a spiff that can cause a 1%-3% risk in your chances of getting schizophrenia and a risk of cancer then there is a load of scare mongering and you risk getting thrown in jail for years and a criminal record. It’s a person’s own choice to do what they want to their own body. If it brings them pleasure and improves their lives then who is the state to outlaw it.

Another double-standard is the way in which the government insists on keeping the cannabis trade in the black market, thus contributing to organized crime and terrorism. It’s a national disgrace that we are so unenlightened as to criminalize smoking of weed.

We don’t live in a free country at all, just a place where you are allowed to do what you want as long as you are making money and spending money.
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 31/07/2007 :  11:19:02  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Look at page 27 of this report

http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/FinalBatesreport.pdf

How much do you think Cannabis prohibition costs the UK? How much do you think we could make if the trade was taxed.

It's a scandal when people are crying out for extra hospitals, schools etc that we are wasting this potential tax revune.
Go to Top of Page

Miriam Binder
Earthsea



United Kingdom
6127 Posts

Posted - 31/07/2007 :  11:31:51  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moon23

It’s a national disgrace that we are so unenlightened as to criminalize smoking of weed.



So, smoking of weed is okay but smoking tobacco must be discouraged? Sheesh Moon, I wish I had the myopia you seem to enjoy when it comes to debating matters of conscience and consequence.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
Go to Top of Page

moon23
Calaspia



841 Posts

Posted - 31/07/2007 :  12:04:46  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Miriam Binder

quote:
Originally posted by moon23

It’s a national disgrace that we are so unenlightened as to criminalize smoking of weed.



So, smoking of weed is okay but smoking tobacco must be discouraged? Sheesh Moon, I wish I had the myopia you seem to enjoy when it comes to debating matters of conscience and consequence.



No Mim as i've said before I don't think smoking should be discouraged. I just think it should be banned from areas where it affects other people's health. People should be free to smoke in their own homes or outside if they want. Or perhaps even in some special smoking rooms if they were airtight and probably ventilated. I don't think that spiffs if legalized should be exempt from the smoking ban

Do what you will, least it harms none.

It’s the harms none that makes me support the smoking ban and the do what you will that means I support the legalization of cannabis. Come on it’s not the hardest position to get your head around and it is perfectly consistent.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
Jump To:
BrightonLiveWire © 2000-05 ForumCo.com Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 4.36 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000
RSS Feed 1 RSS Feed 2
Powered by ForumCo 2000-2008
TOS - AUP - URA
ForumCo Free Blogs and Galleries
Signup for a free forum or Go Banner Free