Off Topic Cannabis

i copied some of this from the sunderland board cos well im stoned and couldnt be arsed writing a valid reason for this thread.

its a long read but what else you got to do

So, are you in favour of this or not ?

The Liberal Democrats are backing a new report calling for the legalised sale of marijuana through licensed outlets, including "cannabis social clubs".
Criminalising cannabis use is a waste of police time, they say, and increases health risks by leaving many people in the dark about what they are taking.
The party is calling for a "regulated market" to control the pricing, potency and packaging of sales to over-18s.
The Conservatives rejected Lib Dem calls to review drug laws in coalition.
The Lib Dems' attempts to put the issue on the political agenda while in government were rebuffed by Home Secretary Theresa May, who argued existing laws were proving successful in reducing drug use and the harm associated with it.
Cannabis is currently classified as a Class B drug, with possession carrying a maximum sentence of five years in jail or an unlimited fine. Those supplying or producing cannabis face tougher penalties, with up to a maximum of 14 years in jail.
'Untold harm'
But the Lib Dems say the existing "war on drugs" has failed, diverting police resources away from tackling organised crime and that people using cannabis should not be "saddled with criminal convictions" for the rest of their lives.
The party has endorsed a new study, written by an independent panel of advisers, which calls for:

• The sale of cannabis to over-18s to be legalised
• Specialist, licensed stores to be set up, including "single purpose" outlets modelled on pharmacies
• Cannabis to be available over the counter in plain packaging, containing health warnings
• Home cultivation of cannabis to be allowed for personal use
• Small scale cannabis clubs to be licensed
• A new regulator to be set up to oversee the market

The report, whose authors include the government's former chief drugs adviser Sir David Nutt and Mike Barton, the Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary, argues that cannabis should be taxed according to its strength and that doing so could yield up to £1bn a year for the Exchequer.
It claims the health risks associated with cannabis use can be more effectively managed and minimised by through a "responsibly regulated market and public health interventions rather than an unregulated criminal market and punitive criminal justice response".
The Lib Dems will decide whether to adopt the proposals as party policy at its Spring Conference this weekend.

Also a good post from dansafcman:

Cannabis has only been illegal since the end of the alcohol prohibition in the USA. Why ? cos the man in charge of the war on alcohol was scared of losing his job

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-i...a-is-banned_b_9210248.html?pbx=25&te=Upworthy :

Across the world, more and more people are asking: Why is marijuana banned? Why are people still sent to prison for using or selling it?

Most of us assume it's because someone, somewhere sat down with the scientific evidence, and figured out that cannabis is more harmful than other drugs we use all the time -- like alcohol and cigarettes.

Somebody worked it all out, in our best interest.

But when I started to go through the official archives -- researching my bookChasing The Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs -- to find out why cannabis was banned back in the 1930s, I discovered that's not what happened.

Not at all.

In 1929, a man called Harry Anslinger was put in charge of the Department of Prohibition in Washington, D.C. But alcohol prohibition had been a disaster. Gangsters had taken over whole neighborhoods. Alcohol -- controlled by criminals -- had become even more poisonous.

So alcohol prohibition finally ended -- and Harry Anslinger was afraid. He found himself in charge of a huge government department, with nothing for it to do. Up until then, he had said that cannabis was not a problem. It doesn't harm people, he explained, and "there is no more absurd fallacy" than the idea it makes people violent.

please log in to view this image

Harry J. Anslinger, commissioner of the Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics, poses for a photo on September 24, 1930. (AP Photo)

But then -- suddenly, when his department needed a new purpose -- he announced he had changed his mind.

He explained to the public what would happen if you smoked cannabis.

First, you will fall into "a delirious rage." Then you will be gripped by "dreams... of an erotic character." Then you will "lose the power of connected thought." Finally, you will reach the inevitable end-point: "Insanity."

Marijuana turns man into a "wild beast." If marijuana bumped into Frankenstein's monster on the stairs, Anslinger warned, the monster would drop dead of fright.

Harry Anslinger became obsessed with one case in particular. In Florida, a boy called Victor Licata hacked his family to death with an axe. Anslinger explained to America: This is what will happen when you smoke "the demon weed." The case became notorious. The parents of the U.S. were terrified.

What evidence did Harry Anslinger have? It turns out at this time he wrote to the 30 leading scientists on this subject, asking if cannabis was dangerous, and if there should be a ban.

Twenty-nine wrote back and said no.

Anslinger picked out the one scientist who said yes, and presented him to the world. The press -- obsessed with Victor Licata's axe -- cheered them on.

In a panic that gripped America, marijuana was banned. The U.S. told other countries they had to do the same. Many countries said it was a dumb idea, and refused to do it. For example, Mexico decided their drug policy should be run by doctors. Their medical advice was that cannabis didn't cause these problems, and they refused to ban it. The U.S. was furious. Anslinger ordered them to fall into line. The Mexicans held out -- until, in the end, the U.S. cut off the supply of all legal painkillers to Mexico. People started to die in agony in their hospitals. So with regret, Mexico sacked the doctor -- and launched its own drug war.



"The scientific evidence suggests cannabis is safer than alcohol. Alcohol kills 40,000 people every year in the U.S. Cannabis kills nobody."


But at home, questions were being asked. A leading American doctor called Michael Ball wrote to Harry Anslinger, puzzled. He explained he had used cannabis as a medical student, and it had only made him sleepy. Maybe cannabis does drive a small number of people crazy, he said -- but we need to fund some scientific studies to find out.

Anslinger wrote back firmly. "The marihuana evil can no longer be temporized with," he explained, and he would fund no independent science. Then, or ever.

For years, doctors kept approaching him with evidence he was wrong, and he began to snap, telling them they were "treading on dangerous ground" and should watch their mouths.

Today, most of the world is still living with the ban on cannabis that Harry Anslinger introduced, in the nation-wide panic that followed Victor Licata's killing spree.

But here's the catch. Years later, somebody went and looked at the psychiatric files for Victor Licata.

It turns out there's no evidence he ever used cannabis.

He had a lot of mental illness in his family. They had been told a year before he needed to be institutionalized -- but they refused. His psychiatrists never even mentioned marijuana in connection to him.

So, does cannabis make people mad?

The former chief advisor on drugs to the British government, David Nutt, explains -- if cannabis causes psychosis in a straightforward way, then it would show in a straightforward way.

When cannabis use goes up, psychosis will go up. And when cannabis use goes down psychosis will go down.

So does that happen? We have a lot of data from a lot of countries. And it turns out it doesn't. For example, in Britain, cannabis use has increased by a factor of about 40 since the 1960s. And rates of psychosis? They have remained steady.

In fact, the scientific evidence suggests cannabis is safer than alcohol. Alcohol kills 40,000 people every year in the U.S. Cannabis kills nobody -- although Willie Nelson says a friend of his did once die when a bale of cannabis fell on his head.

please log in to view this image

Mason Tvert on Thursday, May 6, 2010. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

This is why, in 2006, a young man in Colorado called Mason Tvert issued a challenge to the then-mayor of Denver and eventual governor, John Hickenlooper. Hickenlooper owned brew-pubs selling alcohol across the state, and it made him rich. But he said cannabis was harmful and had to be banned. So Mason issued him a challenge -- to a duel. You bring a crate of booze. I'll bring a pack of joints. For every hit of booze you take, I'll take a hit of cannabis. We'll see who dies first.

It was the ultimate High Noon.

Mason went on to lead the campaign to legalize cannabis in his state. His fellow citizens voted to do it -- by 55 percent. Now adults can buy cannabis legally, in licensed stores, where they are taxed--and the money is used to build schools. After a year and a half of seeing this system in practice, support for legalization has risen to 69 percent. And even Governor Hickenlooper has started calling it "common sense."

Oh -- and Colorado hasn't been filled with people hacking their families to death yet.

Isn't it time we listened to the science -- and finally put away Victor Licata's axe?

Cross-posted from The Influence. Follow them on Facebook here.

Johann Hari is a British journalist and author. This article is adapted from his New York Times best-sellling book Chasing The Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs. To find out why Glenn Greenwald, Noam Chomsky, Bill Maher, Naomi Klein and Elton John have all praised it, click here.

CORRECTION: This post has been updated to clarify that John Hickenlooper was the mayor of Denver in 2006. He became governor of Colorado in 2011.


So are we falling behind a lot of the world when it comes to our drug laws? Nations are waking up to the fact that the "drug war" is not winnable (even the US ffs) if we were to change things should we go the way of portugal? who have had some very positive social and economical results come back since the change. - http://sensiseeds.com/en/blog/cannabis-portugal-en/

Cannabis law in Portugal
According to Portugal’s Law 30/2000, individuals found in possession of a ‘personal’ quantity of an illegal drug are not subject to arrest, imprisonment or financial penalty, but may be required to attend rehabilitation and recovery classes. If observed in the act of possessing or consuming drugs, an individual may be given a citation by police and referred to a panel of professionals who will determine the best course of treatment.

The quantities defined as ‘personal’ vary according to the drug, and are generally intended to cover ten days’ worth of use. An individual may be in possession of up to twenty-five grams of herbal cannabis or five grams of hashish. As well as cannabis products, possession of up to two grams of cocaine or one gram of heroin, MDMA, amphetamine or methamphetamine is also tolerated.

The law regarding sale and traffic of illegal drugs is far harsher. As Law 30/2000 was solely an amendment to the aspects of the previous drug law relating to possession, the aspects relating to sale and traffic remained unchanged. Thus, as stated in the Decree Law 15/93 of January 1993, sale or traffic of illegal drugs is subject to a maximum of twelve years’ imprisonment; however, if sale or trafficking is conducted to finance an addiction, three years’ imprisonment is the maximum sentence that can be imposed.

The modern cannabis trade in Portugal

Despite fears that the policy would lead to rampant drug tourism in Portugal, there is little evidence that this is the case. Indeed, purchasing cannabis and other drugs is reportedly far more difficult in Portugal than in many other European countries.

In spite of this, the illicit trade in cannabis shows signs that it is increasing year-on-year. Throughout the decade following decriminalisation, seizures of cannabis resin steadily increased each year, with the exception of a significant decline between 2008 and 2009, from sixty-one metric tons to just twenty-three.

The bulk of the cannabis imported into Portugal comes in the form of hashish from Morocco. Portugal is also a significant transit point for hashish destined for the UK and elsewhere in northern Europe, and Portuguese authorities routinely intercept shipments traversing their territorial waters.

On a personal note, i like a drink and a smoke, i also partake in other drugs when the mood strikes me. but for now I'll stick to the herb.

Sometimes i smoke and drink together, but i rarely drink during the week or when i have work the next day as i suffer from hangovers and i hate having just 1 or 2, i like to get drunk when i drink.

So i tend to smoke during the work week and not so much on the weekends when im out, but more because i risk getting arrested if im outside the pub with a bob marley hanging from my bottom lip than lack of wanting to, if we had a red light district id drink there kinda thing so i could have a joint or 3 with me beer.

Ive had issues (as most have im sure) with getting too drunk, things like having fights, getting arrested for stupidity and all the usual things that come with irresponsible drinking. i cant say ive ever had any of those issues with cannabis which ive smoked since i was a teenager.

Also ive seen first hand the benefits of cannabis being used medicinally, luckily my use has always been recreational but ive seen cannabis help more than a handful of close people when prescription drugs only worsened things for them.

So what say you?

 

Summery?

 

rather cold actually

 

oh and free da erb mon

 

Sisu smoked cannabis once

#thatwentwell

 

I'd legalise all recreational drugs...regulate their production, tax them like cigs to pay for the care needed for those who can not handle their habit.

The war on drugs is a myth...they've been around for 10 thousand years and will never go away.

There will always be drug addicts as there are alcoholics and smokers now. Yet we weirdly say these drugs are legal despite their cost on society in terms of health and crime and the economy yet demonise the others.

Once legalised and regulated make it an automatic life sentence to sell drugs outside of the official market.

Simples...

 

And and added bonus...you stop treating the 3rd world countries that produce them like pariahs... The income can start going through govts rather than cartels.

Look at the US...big power was stripped from the gangsters when prohibition and gambling were made more legally available.

 

the worst 2 drugs are legal, know why?

you guessed it they are taxed!!!!!!

they cant officially ever admit it, but one time i asked a copper you have 2 rooms 1 room full of pot heads the other pissheads, which room would you rather go in, and you know which one he chose, yet that was the ilegal activity!!

cops don't have issues with it, most politicians have done it when younger etc, the only issue they have with it is how to tax the ****er and they cant think of one, why they havent decriminalized it!

the world would be a better place if we was all stoned
weekends would be more enjoyable Rather than spending the nite in a cell as you cant handle your alcohol and want to fight everyone, **** that bake a cake instead .

 

Good post Frank very much the same thinking as myself, Theres many reasons why the UK govt will drag this out but when/if they do decide to address the current drug laws i think the uk will 1st look to decriminalisation and medicinal use, and the recreational regulation and sale and taxation will come after like in many, at first reluctant US states.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/cultivation_of_cannabis/

This is the CPS's guidelines on cultivation of cannabis in the uk. to a certain level (under 10 plants) its not treated as a serious issue, so in a way they have become more tolerant for lack of a better word regarding the surge of homegrowers in the uk over the last 10/15 yrs.

Cultivation or Production of Cannabis
Date Produced: 14 February 2012
Title: Drugs
Offence: Cultivation or Production of Cannabis
Legislation: Section 6 (2) Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 for cultivation, Section 4 (2) Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 for production
Mode of Trial: Either Way
Statutory Limitations & Maximum Penalty: 14 years

The definitive drugs guideline comes into place on 27 February 2012 and applies to all drug offences sentenced after that date.

The new guideline may cause an upward shift in the length of sentence for offenders being sentenced for Class B production/cultivation.

The route to sentence:-
Step 1
determine the offender's role; then the category of the offence.

The offenders role
Leading role

• Directing or organising production on a commercial scale;
• Substantial links to, and influence on, others in a chain;
• Expectation of substantial financial gain;
• Uses business as cover;
• Abuses a position of trust or responsibility.

Significant role

• Operation or management function within a chain;
• Involves others in the operation whether by pressure, influence, intimidation or reward;
• Motivated by financial or other advantage, whether or not operating alone;
• Some awareness and understanding of scale of operation.

Lesser role

• Performs a limited function under direction;
• Engaged by pressure, coercion, intimidation;
• Involvement through naivety/exploitation;
• No influence on those above in a chain;
• Very little, if any, awareness or understanding of the scale of operation;
• If own operation, solely for own use (considering reasonableness of account in all the circumstances).

The category of harm is determined by the output/potential output of the operation.
Category 1
an operation capable of producing industrial quantities for commercial use. E.g. a factory, farming size greenhouses or houses dedicated to the growing of cannabis. Look for 'gardeners exploited and trapped in the set up, and networked operation cultivating cannabis over various sites'.

Category 2
an operation capable of producing significant quantities for commercial use. It is easy to identify the smaller operations that fall into category 2; they will be a room or loft dedicated to the growing and drying of cannabis; more 'cottage industry' than 'factory.' What is not so easy is to distinguish top end category 2 from a category 1 case; the only difference between the 2 categories is category 1 is defined as the production of 'industrial' quantities as opposed to 'significant' quantities in category 2.

Category 3
28 plants with an assumed yield of 40g per plant.

Category 4
9 plant domestic operation.

It is worth noting that the guideline assumes a yield of 40g a plant. Up to now a plants yield has often been in issue; it may be that the guideline assumption of 40g a plant will become the standard projection in calculating a plants yield.

Category 1, 2 and 3 cases are likely to share some of the following features:-

1. sophisticated growing system
2. measures taken to conceal the operation;
3. plants well tended;
4. abstraction of electricity or electricity supplied by a generator;
5. look for discarded plant debris (significant amount of rotting stalks/vegetation indicates that there has been earlier growing cycles).

With bottom end category 2 growers and category 3 growers the question arises of what use is to be made of the cannabis. In mitigation the defence may provide a basis of plea which suggest that the offender is supplying to friends; the phrase 'social supply' is often used. Beware of the phrase 'social supply' (see R v. Auton, Hindle, Vincent and Willis [2011] EWCA Crim. 76) supply to friends is unlikely to be free, and supply makes the offence more serious; producers of cannabis are popular and have a lot of close friends when it comes to 'social supply.'


It can only be encouraging that so many other countries are changing their attitudes towards drugs hopefully the uk will soon have to follow suit?

 

Being Cold Hearted it just doesn't make economic sense to keep a market that will never go away illegal, costing you rather than earning you money and criminalising large numbers of the poorest in society...

All our current actions cost a large amount of tax money without eradicating the "problem".

 

I think the problem is our govt would initially have to legitimise the unsavoury characters who control the means of production. Who cares...make it their war...their govts seizing their export markets lol

 

One reason is Big Business

please log in to view this image

Lots of industries would be threatened from the production of hemp/cannabis not just the *** and beer companies. who often fund anti cannabis campaigns and groups and such.

GW Pharma has a massive contract from the govt to grow cannabis and produce sativex and make a profit on a plant/medicine anyone can grow at home

 

But I mean it would be sooooo different than dealing with Arms manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies and Oil companies lol

 

Oooh...cartels vs pharmaceutical companies....that'd be an interesting war lol...

 

Well they had to do that with sinn fein, and cannabis never blew anything up

 

Some interesting bits and pieces I've heard from Colorado..............Colorado is now taking more money in tax from the sale of cannabis than it is
from alcohol sales remarkable but true,bearing in mind alcohol is available from so many places (stores,restaurants,bars etc.)
Also,violent crime is down and drink driving is at its lowest levels in over a decade.
This should have been sorted years ago, but we all know why governments have been dragging their feet regarding decriminalisation/legalisation
Joe Rogan's podcast's are worth a listen/watch (youtube) They regularly cover these issue's and more. OK,it's yank stuff but there is plenty of
interesting views being expressed from people who actually know what they are talking about

 

http://www.thecannabist.co/2016/02/09/colorado-marijuana-sales-2015-reach-996-million/47886/

Colorado marijuana sales skyrocket to more than $996 million in 2015
$996,184,788 — that's the final tally for Colorado marijuana sales as December 2015 figures show a record-setting finish

• By Ricardo Baca, The Cannabist Staff
  
  Licensed and regulated marijuana stores in Colorado sold $996,184,788 worth of recreational and medical cannabis in 2015, according to new data from the state Department of Revenue.
  
  “I think it’s ethical to round that up to a billion,” cannabis industry attorney Christian Sederberg said Tuesday upon first hearing the 2015 totals.
  
  Colorado recreational marijuana sales first started on Jan. 1, 2014.
  
  Colorado also collected more than $135 million in marijuana taxes and fees in 2015 — more than $35 million of which isearmarked for school construction projects.
  
  “These are amazing numbers,” said attorney Steve Fox, one of the principal drafters of Colorado’s pot-legalizing Amendment 64, “especially on the tax revenue side.”
  
  Colorado released marijuana tax data for December 2015 on Tuesday, showing a major uptick in month-over-month sales. Recreational pot sales jumped more than 21 percent from November to December, landing at $62.2 million — a monthly record in the state’s legal era. Medical sales jumped more than 32 percent in the same period, totaling $39.1 million.
  
  The data on Colorado marijuana sales and taxes ended months of speculation surrounding the 2015 totals, which some believed would top $1 billion. Even though sales didn’t reach that lofty mark, legalization advocates are still content with the 2015 totals.
  
  “It’s remarkable that less than seven years ago, all of that money was being spent in the underground market,” said Mason Tvert, the Marijuana Policy Project’s communications director. “Clearly there’s a large demand for marijuana, and we’re now seeing that demand being met by legitimate businesses that are answering to authorities instead of criminals who answer to nobody.”
  
  Colorado’s 2015 marijuana tax and sales totals tell a story of implementation and growth. While the state’s pot shops sold more than $699 million of cannabis in 2014, they moved more than $996 million in 2015 — a year when more pot shops opened, more municipalities started allowing these businesses and more customers found their way into the regulated market. Year-over-year totals for taxes and license fees grew too, from $76 million in 2014 to $135 million in 2015.
  
  The school-funding 15 percent excise tax on wholesale marijuana transfers jumped from $13.3 million in 2014 to more than $35 million in 2015, according to the state.
  
  “I’m really proud of our state and proud of our legislators and local officials, who have helped us transition away from an underground market so quickly,” said Sederberg, “so that our state can see the benefits of tax revenues, regulated sales, jobs and economic development.”
  
  There are three types of state taxes on recreational marijuana: the standard 2.9 percent sales tax; a 10 percent special marijuana sales tax; and a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale marijuana transfers. For December, Colorado collected $11.3 million in recreational taxes and fees and almost $2 million in medical taxes and fees.
  
  
  
  Sales stats for Colorado weed
  A month-by-month look comparing sales of recreational and medical marijuana
  
  
  2015 Recreational total $587,834,219
  2015 Medical total $408,350,569
  2015: $996,184,788
  2014 Recreational total $313,226,353
  2014 Medical total $385,972,452
  2014: $699,198,805
  
  
  
  
• Source: Colorado Dept. of Revenue; graphic by Kevin Hamm, The Denver Post

 

Fridays is collection day.

 

I feel sorry for cannabis users today, most have never truly known the real goodness. You'll be lucky to find anything other than heavily THC induced skunk which is fcking ****e.

Legalising Cannabis will allow legitimate producers to reduce THC and go BACK to original weed - the real goodness Who knows, we may even have legalised manufacturers who remove the seeds for us (there'll be some younguns on here who will have no idea what that means) but if you've only ever smoked skunk, you really haven't lived tbh.

That imo is the best argument for legalisation - the return to proper weed and the reduction in THC levels, which will have two major benefits - firstly to reduce a chemical which has serious long-term implications for psychosis and mental ability if taken in excessive amounts (as with skunk) during your teens, and secondly to provide a much better high which is nowt to to with monging out the user.

 

Firstly smoking weed is far less of a risk than smoking cigarettes with all the crap that's pumped into them.
The argument for it being a gateway drug to other substances would be my only concern as it is. I believe that risk also dissapates with legalisation though.
I haven't read the above but feel it's a substance that is demonized so that control of the cigarette industry can be maintained. These are the real criminals that we should be after, people who intentionally poison and addict people for financial gain.