Legalise cannabis?

[Steven]

Why are drugs illegal? You asked Google – here’s the answer

David Nutt

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/28/why-are-drugs-illegal-google-answer

[Guest seanfox778]

I used to smoke it a lot until I got bored with it and realised it didn't do anything for me but other people find it works for them. Same with alcohol, works for some people and others it doesn't. We're all adults and it's strange we're not allowed to make decisions for ourselves. Just legalise it and let people choose whether they want to do it or not. I can't get my head around the fact that people sit in a room discussing whether we're allowed certain products. As long as they're clear what the product is then everyone should have a right to choose what they want to put into their own body.

[Mickey O'Neil]

Leicester fans are all pot-heads. Official. Next you'll be singing the virtues of NPS (mamba, spice, Pandora's box et al). 

[Steven]

Cannabis legalisation in the UK 'would raise £1bn a year in taxes'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cannabis-legalisation-marijuana-uk-1bn-a-year-in-taxes-a6918161.html

[Buce]

Cannabis legalisation in the UK 'would raise £1bn a year in taxes'

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cannabis-legalisation-marijuana-uk-1bn-a-year-in-taxes-a6918161.html

But would it? If they tax it to the same level as they do tobacco, people will still use the black market. Ditto if they only allow mild strains.

[theessexfox]

Government policy looks to be going the other way, criminalizing legal highs.

[DillonLive]

Legalize everything, cut out the criminality, educate properly and let people decide if they want to be fvcked up or not.

 

Yes, very good point! 

[Bellend Sebastian]

Not a lot new in here but some interesting insight from someone at the sharp end. I think the only thing that's out of date about it is that more coppers - including senior ones - would probably agree with him now than when he left the force a few years ago:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/26/neil-woods-undercover-cop-who-abandoned-the-war-on-drugs

[James.]

On 8/28/2016 at 08:18, Bellend Sebastian said:

Not a lot new in here but some interesting insight from someone at the sharp end. I think the only thing that's out of date about it is that more coppers - including senior ones - would probably agree with him now than when he left the force a few years ago:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/26/neil-woods-undercover-cop-who-abandoned-the-war-on-drugs

 

I came on here to post that link and as soon as I saw you were last poster I knew you'd got there first. Is a fascinating article and one of the most persuasive arguments for a complete overhaul of drug policy that I've read. As he says towards the end one day we'll look back on these times and wonder what the hell we were doing. Momentum is building though so hopefully that day comes sooner rather than later.

[Buce]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/may/02/study-cannabis-cannabidiol-cbd-ability-to-help-children-brain-tumours

 

British scientists are investigating whether a compound found in cannabis could be used to shrink brain tumours in children.

The study of the effects of cannabidiol (CBD), the non-psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, was prompted by a growing number of parents giving it to children with a brain tumour after buying it online. The lead researcher, Prof Richard Grundy of Nottingham University’s children’s brain tumour centre, said in the last six months there had been a surge in parents administering it without medical advice in the belief it might help.

While no research has been done into how CBD can help children’s brain tumours, some work has been done looking at how cannabis-based molecules can help adult cancer patients. Products containing cannabidiol can be bought online, although recent changes mean companies now require a licence to sell them.

“New ways to treat childhood brain tumours are urgently needed to extend and improve the quality of life in malignant brain tumour patients, so we are excited at the prospect of testing the effect of cannabidiol on brain tumour cells,” said Grundy.

Brain tumours kill more children in the UK than any other type of cancer. Around 1,750 under-18s each year are diagnosed with cancer, of which about 400 are cancers of the brain and spinal cord.

The study, thought to be the first of its kind in the world, will seek to establish whether CBD reduces tumours. The researchers will grow cells from different brain tumours in lab conditions, some with the addition of cannabidiol molecules and others without. They will then compare how the presence of tumour cells differs in both samples through a technique called cell staining. This will help them see how many of the cells are dividing and whether any are dying.

Grundy said: “We expect the cells – brain tumour and normal brain – grown in our standard conditions to be healthy and actively dividing. We expect that normal brain cells grown in cannabidiol will remain healthy. However, we expect the brain tumour cells grown in cannabidiol to stop growing and dividing.

Katie Sheen, of the Astro Brain Tumour Fund, which is co-funding the study, said if it proved to be successful CBD could be a gentler, less toxic way of treating cancer than chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Dr Wai Liu, a research fellow at St George’s University of London, said: “We have performed experiments using CBD in leukaemia and it can deactivate signalling pathways, making cells more responsive to chemotherapy.”

He said some drug companies combined CBD with psychoactive component tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) with positive responses, especially when combined with chemotherapy.

Liu added: “All cells need to communicate and these communications get jammed up, and CBD tries to correct this by restoring them. This ultimately results in these cells being able to undergo cell death.”

“People think that children’s cells are more flexible so there is a possibility that CBD may have a slightly different effect. We will only be able to understand the precise mechanism and value of this treatment when studies like this are done.”

Among those supporting the project are the parents of William Frost, a four-year-old who was diagnosed with a ependymoma brain tumour in 2014 and is being treated at the Nottingham centre. William’s father, Steve, said: “We were told halfway through 2016 that nothing more could be done for William. We couldn’t bear to accept the news and decided to look into alternative treatments.

“We started William on a low-carbohydrate (ketogenic) diet and cannabidiol. Six months later William’s tumour had shrunk by two-thirds. He is slowly improving and attending school part-time.”

[Steven]

On 5/2/2017 at 22:02, Buce said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/may/02/study-cannabis-cannabidiol-cbd-ability-to-help-children-brain-tumours

This cannot be right. "Cannabis is a highly dangerous and addictive substance that is only one step away from Opium". (The Home Office) 

[thebartonfox]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p051swg1

 

This is an interesting listen. It says 30,000 people use cannabis daily for medicinal uses, with there being no doubt that it has a significant affect to improve a lot of peoples lives.

 

I use it as a painkiller to manage chronic pain. Since beginning to use it last year the difference in my life is extraordinary, I am in a lot less pain and am taking far fewer opiates to manage my condition. I'm able to do so much more than I could before, a small dose is really effective as a painkiller, and doesn't really give much of a "high" so I can still function, and certainly function much better than on other painkillers. The cannabis works so much more effectively than opiates like codeine, which seems to mask the pain rather than actually killing it. It's so infuriating that it's still a class I drug with "no medical use". As the lady in the interview says, that's just not correct...

[Foxxed]

I still can't believe anyone's seriously against this. Even the US has legalised it in many places.

 

Who are these people who are vehemently against it? I'm sure they exist but I've never seen them or spoken to them.

 

The only sound medical argument against it is, I think, that it can exacerbate people who have schizophrenic tenancies.

 

But I think the same applies for many other legal substances.

 

The only social argument against it is that people may mope around smoking it instead of work. And the same argument is true for alcohol.

 

Legalise it. Take money away from drug dealing gangs. Give money to the government through tax. Create more profit from firms selling it.

[thebartonfox]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39897999

 

The Lib Dems will have a pledge to legalise it in their manifesto. 

[The People's Hero]

On 12/05/2017 at 15:13, thebartonfox said:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39897999

 

The Lib Dems will have a pledge to legalise it in their manifesto. 

Must be nice to make up a manifesto when you know you won't be required to act on it. 

 

Thought lessons may have been learnt over tuition fees promises but evidently not !

 

Might as well promise zero taxes all round and perfect public services. 

[Carl the Llama]

20 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

Must be nice to make up a manifesto when you know you won't be required to act on it. 

 

Thought lessons may have been learnt over tuition fees promises but evidently not !

 

Might as well promise zero taxes all round and perfect public services. 

Ok but what's your reason for thinking this is a bad policy?  It's about the most sensible, cost effective policy outlined by any party so far from what I can tell.

[ealingfox]

This really should be an absolute no-brainer. Some of the US states that have taken this step have considered giving all it's citizens tax rebates because they're literally making too much money from it.

 

What's in the way is the country rubes, provincial monkeys and Middle England NIMBYs that always have the strongest opinions on issues like these despite being the least affected by them.

 

Daily Mail tells them if we go anywhere near legalisation then their kids will turn into zombies and Scarface will move in next door so Sue, 43, from Sutton Coldfield, thinks it's a bad idea and would be the end of civilisation.

[Bellend Sebastian]

I can smell it in practically every outdoor public place I go now anyway

[China Black]

I hate cannabis. Such a revolting smell.

[ajthefox]

On 5/5/2017 at 01:49, Foxxed said:

I still can't believe anyone's seriously against this. Even the US has legalised it in many places.

 

Who are these people who are vehemently against it? I'm sure they exist but I've never seen them or spoken to them.

 

The only sound medical argument against it is, I think, that it can exacerbate people who have schizophrenic tenancies.

 

But I think the same applies for many other legal substances.

 

The only social argument against it is that people may mope around smoking it instead of work. And the same argument is true for alcohol.

 

Legalise it. Take money away from drug dealing gangs. Give money to the government through tax. Create more profit from firms selling it.

I struggle with that, I never know which of my flats to go home to after work...

[Foxxed]

The Lib Dems want to legalise it. Should be a fairly easy argument with Canada and the US leading the way but they'll probably be pummelled for it. If it randomly became a Tory policy I wonder how the Telegraph would react. I'd hope for a U-turn regarding a "Bold step to stop drug gangs and increase tax revenue" but I've never seen any polling of Telegraph reader opinions on the issue.

[The People's Hero]

10 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Ok but what's your reason for thinking this is a bad policy?  It's about the most sensible, cost effective policy outlined by any party so far from what I can tell.

I don't think it's a bad policy. When an electable party makes it part of their manifesto, I'll take a view. For now we might as well be debating what Kermit the Frog thinks about global warming or renewable energy or fiscal policy. 

[Foxxed]

2 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

I don't think it's a bad policy. When an electable party makes it part of their manifesto, I'll take a view. For now we might as well be debating what Kermit the Frog thinks about global warming or renewable energy or fiscal policy. 

You did imply they wouldn't act on it though. I mean yes they failed to follow through with their pledge when they were a minority party in a coalition government but taking that and implying any future manifesto is nothing but lies is somewhat extreme.

[The People's Hero]

8 hours ago, Foxxed said:

You did imply they wouldn't act on it though. I mean yes they failed to follow through with their pledge when they were a minority party in a coalition government but taking that and implying any future manifesto is nothing but lies is somewhat extreme.

Perhaps. But as a historian I tend to look at evidence as opposed to favouring blind optimism and faith in the honesty of people and large organisations. 

 

Point is words and promises are cheap if you won't be called to act on them. Lib dems have form for making promises, accidentally getting elected (partially) and then entirely abandoning most of their manifesto. 

 

 

[Vacamion]

42 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Perhaps. But as a historian I tend to look at evidence as opposed to favouring blind optimism and faith in the honesty of people and large organisations. 

 

Point is words and promises are cheap if you won't be called to act on them. Lib dems have form for making promises, accidentally getting elected (partially) and then entirely abandoning most of their manifesto. 

 

 

 

You can't seriously be reproaching the Libs for not enacting their manifesto when they were a minority partner in a coalition, can you?

 

I think that it's a sensible move putting it in their manifesto.

 

You would think that free market / libertarian inclined Tories would support the legalisation (and taxation) of a product already being enjoyed the length of the country, but the Tories of 2017 are the opposite of bold or innovative.

 

To the detriment of the country, prohibition will remain.