1. avatar daveshorty
    [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/sacked-ndash-for-telling-the-truth-about-drugs-1812255.html]Article here[/url]

    Why are the government so determined to keep the focus off alcohol/cigs and on illegal drugs? If I was a cynical man I'd say it's cus they can't tax the drugs.

    [img:0b6ade978f]http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh89/daveshorty/DOU2.jpg[/img:0b6ade978f]
  2. avatar supersonicsolos
    i think grass will be legal in the next ten years .the tobacco companys are just waiting for this so they can corner the whole market
  3. avatar my-angel-rocks
    [quote:97cd6eaf85="daveshorty"]Why are the government so determined to keep the focus off alcohol/cigs and on illegal drugs?[/quote:97cd6eaf85]

    Because politicians' core voters like cigarettes and alcohol and don't really like these new fangled scary drugs. Government policy on drugs has never been rational and is mostly driven by the middle england focused media (essentially the Mail and Sun as they have a larger circulation than all the other papers combined). These papers have a lot of sway over their readers, so if the government relaxes drug policy, the papers whip up such a frenzy about the end of civilised society that the only thing to do is reverse the policy. It happened fairly recently over the lowering of cannabis to class C and it happened in the 80s (I think) over government giving addicts heroin, the stopping of that policy led to a huge rise in black market heroin (and the associated side effects from the decline in quality control) and an increase in heroin abuse.
  4. avatar VimFuego
    This backlash from the scientific community was enevitable. When the goverment was preparing to reclassify cabnnabis last year, the "reefer madness" propeganda was rife, on every news paper, on every news report leading up to the decision to reclassify cannabis as a class b drug. The brainwashing machine went into overload and we were all being told that cannabis could cause psychosis and other elaborate consequences. They ignored the decision from their advisors to either leave it as a class c or decriminalise it altogether. They have had no problem criminalising thousands of people in the uk for soft drug use while turning a blind eye to the very obvious problems caused by alchohol. A problem which causes the Goverments purse millions every year...although thats ok because sure they make millions taxing alchohol and tobacco.

    Just more evidence to backup the fact that the truth will never be allowed to surface regarding this matter and the goverment will quash all attempts to let the facts actually rise to the top of the shit pile they have created.
  5. avatar rl-vl
    nutt sacked!
  6. avatar Numbnut Sounds
    For you to scoff at the suggestion that "cannabis could cause psychosis and other elaborate consequences" is frankly naive.

    It does.

    It also does not make sense to argue that because alcohol and tobacco are legal, cannabis should also be.
  7. avatar Recycled Alien
    [quote:bec55692b1="Numbnut Sounds"]For you to scoff at the suggestion that "cannabis could cause psychosis and other elaborate consequences" is frankly naive.

    It does.[/quote:bec55692b1]Who'd have thought that we'd have someone who knows more about the science than Professor Nutt right here on this forum. New chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs?
  8. avatar my-angel-rocks
    [quote:971b8e4226="Numbnut Sounds"]For you to scoff at the suggestion that "cannabis could cause psychosis and other elaborate consequences" is frankly naive.

    It does.[/quote:971b8e4226]

    Professor Nutt agrees with you, you know.

    'He ... argued that, to prevent one episode of schizophrenia linked to cannabis use, it would be necessary to "stop 5,000 men aged 20 to 25 from ever using" the drug.'
  9. avatar salfhal
    Cannabis is less harmful than the other substances, he only voiced his anger when it was reclassified as B - putting it on a par with drugs like Meth, possession charges of up to 5 years prison and an unlimted fine.

    The government had scientific evidence presented to them.

    They ignored it and reclassified it to suit themselves. By demonising the substance they then believe that they can fob the people off with a load of shite...

    Brown has said countless times that cannabis is "lethal" when it's not, the professor pointed out that both cigarettes and alcohol are much more dangerous.

    [i:2a3267ba48]The research that supports the idea that cannabis causes mental illness have to be reviewed carefully as they're often based around subjects who are identified as "dependent on cannabis" i.e. addicted (cannabis is not addictive in itself, however people with EXISTING addiction problems and mental health issues can become dependent).

    The figures can be manipluated to make horror stories, but;

    3/4 of people dependent on cannabis are male, and 20% of ALL MEN and 29% of ALL WOMEN are likely to be treated for a mental health problem (regardless of drug use). How is it possible then to define these people as not going to develop mental illness anyway, AT LEAST 1/5 of any test group would have to be disgarded. However most of these studies have come out with figures less than the value of 1/5 of overall increase in mental illness, so the figures don't actually mean anything. [National Statistics (2003)]

    69% of cannabis dependents use other illegal drugs; so how is it possible to determine that cannabis was the cause of any problem.[The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report (2001)]

    40% of people under 18 who smoke have a mental health problem. [The Mental Health of Children and Young People Report 1999]

    1/4 of unemployed people (not including unemployment due to disability, i.e. actual "jobseekers") have a mental illness[The Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity report (2001)][/i:2a3267ba48]


    [b:2a3267ba48]If classification wasn't just a propaganda exercise, and based on the danger of the substance; alcohol and cigarettes should be raised to Class A (heroin, crack etc)& fatty food should be raised to class B (meth etc) [/b:2a3267ba48]

    Actually while we're talking about drugs; it's an outrage that magic mushrooms are on a par with posession of heroin, shrooms weren't even illigal till like 2 years ago and went straight to A!. Similarly how cannabis is on a par with meth (B).

    </rant>
  10. avatar Stuntman Steve
    [quote:f41a7cb822]It also does not make sense to argue that because alcohol and tobacco are legal, cannabis should also be.[/quote:f41a7cb822]

    well i we are talking comparitively (which we are, cos thats what the classification system requires), then it makes perfect sense to say that given the scientific evidence.
  11. avatar Warren Drugs
    [quote:45f21dfa6b="salfhal"]
    Brown has said countless times that cannabis is "lethal"[/quote:45f21dfa6b]

    Most people I know say that too.
  12. avatar VimFuego
    [quote:feddaf71b4="Numbnut Sounds"]For you to scoff at the suggestion that "cannabis could cause psychosis and other elaborate consequences" is frankly naive.

    It does.

    It also does not make sense to argue that because alcohol and tobacco are legal, cannabis should also be.[/quote:feddaf71b4]

    So in that case, seeing as alchohol and tobacco are PROVEN to be dangerous..they should be made illegal too? Heavens no! That would upset the grass root voters, better to make up some facts in your head and then use them to support your draconian manifesto policies...we will ignore the fact that all the experts in the field disagree...sure we will fire them and bang the propeganda drum even harder.
  13. avatar POSITIVExYOUTH
    [quote:89efa86847="Numbnut Sounds"]
    It also does not make sense to argue that because alcohol and tobacco are legal, cannabis should also be.[/quote:89efa86847]

    I 100% agree with this man here.

    This is the most fucking retarded argument possible that somehow pops up quite frequently.
  14. avatar unspecified_trend
    Ok, if we look at it like this: Tobacco is taken for enjoyment, but eventually can cause lung cancer, impotence, not to mention is hard to quit due to addictiveness. We can look to the side as people smoke themselves to an early grave right, because it's their choice.

    Alcohol is another, causes countless amounts of anti social behaviour, responsible for deaths on the road and again is harmful to the body. But we enjoy it, and since enough money is pumped into its franchise and gives countless jobs, why should we stop it?

    Personally, I've never seen someone on grass start fights or put someone's life in danger except their own. It's like taking the harmful effects of tobacco and the great feelings of alcohol, and meeting in the middle. Amsterdam seem to survive pretty well, a sustainable source of income and not to mention the medicinal possibilities (As a pain reliever)

    Personally i don't see any problem with it being legalised, it's great craic :)
  15. avatar The Ronster
    Surely this is appropriate at this juncture?
    [img:1c26c30b53]http://img.skitch.com/20091102-emk4eb8wh5e458gd8ktkrf7jmx.jpg[/img:1c26c30b53]
  16. avatar tinpot anto
    Them guys are clearly very pleased at getting into that disco.
  17. avatar The Ronster
    It's a quare stamp the door person has too.
  18. avatar tinpot anto
    I thought it was just one of them big giant markers.
  19. avatar Stuntman Steve
    [quote:e28b20b013] Numbnut Sounds wrote:

    It also does not make sense to argue that because alcohol and tobacco are legal, cannabis should also be.

    I 100% agree with this man here.

    This is the most fucking retarded argument possible that somehow pops up quite frequently.
    [/quote:e28b20b013]

    hardly. granted some idiots will just argue this and nothing more, but in the current classification system and scientific evidence it makes sense. the system classifies the legality of drugs by their relative harmfulness. (most) scientists are classifying cannabis less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. so its not retarded, completely valid if u ask me.
  20. avatar POSITIVExYOUTH
    [quote:5e6c15822c="unspecified_trend"]
    Personally, I've never seen someone on grass start fights or put someone's life in danger except their own. [/quote:5e6c15822c]

    I'd like to point out that the same way people crash under the influence of alcohol, they can also crash under the influence of cannabis. I personally know people that did crash after smoking themselves stupid.

    [quote:5e6c15822c="unspecified_trend"]not to mention the medicinal possibilities (As a pain reliever)[/quote:5e6c15822c]

    But that is completely and absolutely irrelevant to the issue of cannabis for recreational use. Which is what always pisses me off when there is an argument about legalisation. A lot of pople come up with good reasons concerning the enviroment, alternative sources of energy and whatnot which are all very well and good but that have fuck all to do with the reasons why it should be made legal for recreational use.

    [quote:5e6c15822c="Stuntman Steve"]
    the system classifies the legality of drugs by their relative harmfulness. (most) scientists are classifying cannabis less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. so its not retarded, completely valid if u ask me.[/quote:5e6c15822c]

    Well it is stupid as fuck because it's bloody common sense that you should criminalise the more harmful things rather than decriminalise what is less harmful but still harmful. This argument is used the wrong way round in a way that makes very little sense.
    As you rightly say, drugs are devided in categories according to their harmfulness. Cannabis is harmful in many ways, it makes very little sense to decriminalise it just because alcohol and tobacco are legal despite being more harmful. The logic thing to do would rather be to criminalise alcohol and tobacco and place them into category B or A, hypothetically spaking.
  21. avatar VimFuego
    We will never see alcohol and tobacco made illegal. I agree with your point that if they are to make cannabis illegal then the same should be done for fags and booze but it will never happen. Meanwhile thousands of people are criminalised for recreational drug use..this is where the main point of the argument is for me anyway. The utter hypocrisy of the Goverments policy and classing of drugs is a farce, as is having a goverment advisory comittee who get fired for presenting real life facts with evidence to back it up. You want to make harmful things illegal, then dont pick and choose what suits you, ban the whole fucking lot and then see how many people are criminalised.
  22. avatar ryanego
    I agree that alcohol will never be banned, so I suppose the problem is that if we had a host more substances, comparably harmful and equally available and socially acceptable as alcohol and tobacco, there's a good chance we'd all be fucked.

    I suppose we're all fucked anyways.

    To fire aul Nutt job is an absolute disgrace in the extreme. I will never understand why our lives are continually governed by misinformation, prejudice, superstition, myths and general politically driven bullshit, rather than sound replicable evidence and reasoning. It makes me want to boke.

    Agh
  23. avatar RudeMood
    [quote:6c716db09c]To fire aul Nutt job is an absolute disgrace in the extreme. I will never understand why our lives are continually governed by misinformation, prejudice, superstition, myths and general politically driven bullshit, rather than sound replicable evidence and reasoning. It makes me want to boke.[/quote:6c716db09c]

    Very well said sir.
  24. avatar supersonicsolos
    if god grows it how can it be wrong
  25. avatar savagebilliards
    "I'd like to point out that the same way people crash under the influence of alcohol, they can also crash under the influence of cannabis. I personally know people that did crash after smoking themselves stupid."

    Yes true, but IMO anybody that is partaking in any drug taking should not be driving (or operating machinery:D ) that is just irresponsible and dangerous.
    Having a smoke to chill out - I can see no problem if thats your thing.
  26. avatar POSITIVExYOUTH
    [quote:50290bfe5b="ryanego"]I agree that alcohol will never be banned, so I suppose the problem is that if we had a host more substances, comparably harmful and equally available and socially acceptable as alcohol and tobacco, there's a good chance we'd all be fucked.[/quote:50290bfe5b]

    Or alternatively, governments should do what they should have done from day one. Rather than criminalise or legittimise certain substances they should have promoted responsible attitudes to consumption and informed about the risks and harms. And I don't mean the half-assed initiatives we see all the time, I mean proper hardcore sensibilisation (is that the word in English or am I once again translating from Italian?).

    To be honest I wouldn't see any particular problem in legalising some drugs if there was a 'healthy' and responsible attitude towards these drugs. If people understood the risks of taking certain drugs and understood that they should moderate the use also keeping in mind problems that may arise from being under the influence of drugs then so be it. The same mentality that allows certain drugs to be partly-legalised in the Netherlands, where the only ones that get seriously baked off their tits are tourists (just to reinforce the idea that in many Western European countries people do not have a responsible attitude to certain drugs).
    But until this sort of attitude is developed and strongly engrained in our society/way of thinking then there needs to be some serious thinking about what should be legalised and what shouldn't on the basis of this and imposing severe restrictions on what is already legal. And this goes with alcohol too.

    As for the driving after smoking weed, it was just to show that it's bullshit to say that alcohol causes road collisions as trying to point out at its dangerousness. Road collisions are caused by irresponsibility, so you can crash after drinking or after smoking and it's not due to either substance, it's because you were a moron in deciding to drive in the first place after consuming such substances.
  27. avatar savagebilliards
    agree!
  28. avatar ryanego
    [quote:2f6068815e]As for the driving after smoking weed, it was just to show that it's bullshit to say that alcohol causes road collisions as trying to point out at its dangerousness. Road collisions are caused by irresponsibility, so you can crash after drinking or after smoking and it's not due to either substance, it's because you were a moron in deciding to drive in the first place after consuming such substances.

    [/quote:2f6068815e]

    While I agree to an extent, alcohol directly affects your judgement, so there is an element of cause and effect about it. I would guess that a substantial portion of people who drink drive probably wouldn't drink drive sober.
  29. avatar POSITIVExYOUTH
    [quote:288ceb18f0="ryanego"]
    While I agree to an extent, alcohol directly affects your judgement, so there is an element of cause and effect about it. I would guess that a substantial portion of people who drink drive probably wouldn't drink drive sober.[/quote:288ceb18f0]

    And what is the difference with weed? Weed too affects your judgement.
  30. avatar ryanego
    Yea fair point, I just wasn't commenting on it as I'm not as familiar with it.
  31. avatar savagebilliards
    we all know that both cause STD'S, unwanted pregnancies, violence and car crashes and whacked out hippy ideas! I read it in the Mail and the Express! :109: