The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well, the drug is being (or has been) downgraded to class C. What does this mean? The government are keen to point out that it is still illegal, that those in possession will still be arrested.
On the news tonight, they used the phrase "Cannabis, a drug tens of thousands of people choose to smoke each week". I think they are seriously underestimating how widespread its use is. I wager everyone on here knows somebody who smokes it, I certainly do. Could decriminalizing the drug work in this country? There are huge benefits for the government in the way that it would free up a lot of police time, which could be used for catching those dealing/possessing harder drugs.
Is there any point whatsoever in downgrading the drug as they have done?
Do you have any views on the drug, or the questions I have asked above?
On the news tonight, they used the phrase "Cannabis, a drug tens of thousands of people choose to smoke each week". I think they are seriously underestimating how widespread its use is. I wager everyone on here knows somebody who smokes it, I certainly do. Could decriminalizing the drug work in this country? There are huge benefits for the government in the way that it would free up a lot of police time, which could be used for catching those dealing/possessing harder drugs.
Is there any point whatsoever in downgrading the drug as they have done?
Do you have any views on the drug, or the questions I have asked above?
Page:
English_Bloke wrote:
> That is stupid.
>
> That’s like saying, “He’s broken the law, but he’s poor, so we’ll
> leave him alone”.
>
> They should both be prosecuted.
But what's the point? What purpose would it serve?
How can you rehabilitate somebody who only turned to cannabis as a last resort anyway? Do you really think a fine or imprisonment would be a fair punishment for a pennyless and abandoned tramp? Community service maybe, but it's these people that really should be helped.
> That is stupid.
>
> That’s like saying, “He’s broken the law, but he’s poor, so we’ll
> leave him alone”.
>
> They should both be prosecuted.
But what's the point? What purpose would it serve?
How can you rehabilitate somebody who only turned to cannabis as a last resort anyway? Do you really think a fine or imprisonment would be a fair punishment for a pennyless and abandoned tramp? Community service maybe, but it's these people that really should be helped.
English_Bloke wrote:
> ... (no point fighting a losing battle) ...
It's more like the Black Knight in Monty Python And The Holy Grail ...
> ... (no point fighting a losing battle) ...
It's more like the Black Knight in Monty Python And The Holy Grail ...
That is stupid.
That’s like saying, “He’s broken the law, but he’s poor, so we’ll leave him alone”.
They should both be prosecuted.
That’s like saying, “He’s broken the law, but he’s poor, so we’ll leave him alone”.
They should both be prosecuted.
The fact is, that homeless person has nothing to lose.
The government should help him, rather than prosecute him. The businessman should know better.
The government should help him, rather than prosecute him. The businessman should know better.
I'm not trying to be clever, (no point fighting a losing battle), it's just the truth.
It is completely the wrong way for the system to work, but hey, I don't run it.
It is completely the wrong way for the system to work, but hey, I don't run it.
Good answer, English.
:^D
:^D
Yukikaze wrote:
> I will bet you EB that if you arrested two people for Cannabis use -
> one a homeless person, the other a twentysomething office worker, and
> put them in court, that the sentences would be entirely different
You are quite correct. The businessman would end up paying a much bigger fine. Why? Because the court knows he CAN pay it.
> I will bet you EB that if you arrested two people for Cannabis use -
> one a homeless person, the other a twentysomething office worker, and
> put them in court, that the sentences would be entirely different
You are quite correct. The businessman would end up paying a much bigger fine. Why? Because the court knows he CAN pay it.
Yukikaze wrote:
> If it has medicinal uses why has no one developed a legal drug from
> it? Medicine largely comes from plant sources and nature. Why has no
> one ever manufactured this wonder drug that would have massive
> potential as it would apparently be the only thing to work?
Here's something for you to read ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1826446.stm
... but, if you can't be bothered, here are some quotes:-
- Cannabis-based pain relief drugs could be available on prescription from the National Heath Service (NHS) within two years, the Department of Health (DoH) has announced.
- "I think it's important to make a distinction between the drugs for MS pain relief and the use of cannabis for smoking, for pleasure," said Lord Hunt.
- Drug companies have isolated the active ingredients in cannabis and made them available in the form of a pill or a spray.
- Nina Booth-Clibborn, executive director, said: "A large number of people have reported to us that cannabis helps them to manage severe medical conditions, even when prescription medicines have failed."
> If it has medicinal uses why has no one developed a legal drug from
> it? Medicine largely comes from plant sources and nature. Why has no
> one ever manufactured this wonder drug that would have massive
> potential as it would apparently be the only thing to work?
Here's something for you to read ...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1826446.stm
... but, if you can't be bothered, here are some quotes:-
- Cannabis-based pain relief drugs could be available on prescription from the National Heath Service (NHS) within two years, the Department of Health (DoH) has announced.
- "I think it's important to make a distinction between the drugs for MS pain relief and the use of cannabis for smoking, for pleasure," said Lord Hunt.
- Drug companies have isolated the active ingredients in cannabis and made them available in the form of a pill or a spray.
- Nina Booth-Clibborn, executive director, said: "A large number of people have reported to us that cannabis helps them to manage severe medical conditions, even when prescription medicines have failed."
Strafio wrote:
> Ban smoking and leagalise cannabis.
>
> Hash cake for all! ;-D
I'll go with that!
> Ban smoking and leagalise cannabis.
>
> Hash cake for all! ;-D
I'll go with that!
Maverick42 wrote:
> I think it should be illegal because it is yet another highly
> addictive health hazard ...
"Chances of getting hooked?
Unlikely. There is a minimal risk of physical dependence. Psychological dependency occurs in about 10% of users.
Users are more likely to get addicted to nicotine if they roll their spliffs with tobacco. There are no physical withdrawal symptoms if you've only been using for a short while and there should be no problem stopping (unless you get addicted to the tobacco)."
> I think it should be illegal because it is yet another highly
> addictive health hazard ...
"Chances of getting hooked?
Unlikely. There is a minimal risk of physical dependence. Psychological dependency occurs in about 10% of users.
Users are more likely to get addicted to nicotine if they roll their spliffs with tobacco. There are no physical withdrawal symptoms if you've only been using for a short while and there should be no problem stopping (unless you get addicted to the tobacco)."
Page: