cannabis live

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by paradox, Mar 3, 2015.

  1. Did anyone watch it?
     
  2. Yeah, quite entertaining if a little lightweight in terms of the science. John Snow seemed quite upset, but then who wouldn't after having their soul wrenched from their body?
     
  3. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    I watched and found the arguments for only vaguely more compelling that the alcohol lobby.

    I don't want to live in a world where people can basically throw away responsibility for themselves whenever they want and leave the onus in looking after them to the rest of us, unasked.

    Imagine the tube at Rush hour where 30% of people's short term memory is shot as they are high.
     
    Jack Tatty and brothernumberone like this.
  4. PSG

    PSG

    they should get him on the skag next.
     
    vanorak likes this.
  5. What a stupid thing to do, get high and then put yourself in a small tube for an mri scan. Mri's freak out just about everyone and that's when you're straight.
     
    julesd, Lord Congi and tommygoldy like this.
  6. Jack Tatty

    Jack Tatty Supporter and teachers pet

    Didn't catch it, was it like Spring Watch but with Shaun Ryder n Bez instead of Bill Oddie and Kate Humble?
     
    zed, Lord Congi, vanorak and 2 others like this.
  7. I wonder if he'd have had a better experience without the MRI, but with a comfy sofa, some biscuits, and a box set of breaking bad.
    Just a thought.
     
    zed, vanorak and Paul zen like this.
  8. Now that I'd watch! :D
     
  9. I was amazed at the fact that California had raised £40million in tax since it's legalisation

    UK gov is missing out on the alledged £800 million that goes into the hands of organised crime in that case

    ....for something that would placate the masses, is less harmful than alcohol (allegedly) and could raise millions in taxes ...I'm surprised the govenment hasnt jumped at the chance to legalise it.

    all credit to those who gave it a go though, especially John Snow and the ex-drug cop
     
    Beakey and art b like this.
  10. Sorry, too stoned to understand it.....
     
    Clive Neilands and Beakey like this.
  11. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    They loose me at the proposition that something bad, is in fact good because it is marginally better than something else bad.

    Two bads, it is that simple.

    I'm no advocate of alcohol, so any argument for or against that is lost on me.

    There is increasing research showing adverse affects on mental from weed, wellbeing and health in the short and medium term and these don't diminish over time.


    How is that good?


    As for the tax benefit, no comment on the increased costs to health provision or loss to the workforce I notice.
     
    Pickles and Jono1249 like this.
  12. Nobody would pay the tax if it was legal. Buy a legal spliff and pay 20% vat or grow your own in a potting shed or from a local dealer without tax? Let me think. Bit like bootleg vodka or counterfeit cigs as you get more for your money.
    I've seen too many people who are totally f- up or dead through alcohol or any form of drugs including cannabis.
    Sorry if it's a bit strong but it never ceases to amaze me how man kind in general has evolved into a remarkable creature of nature to self destruct in the pursuit of cheap thrills and escapism and then use supposed intellect to justify it.
     
    Moons likes this.
  13. No point me watching the prog.

    I used to really, really like it.
    But I did too much, for too long and I spoiled it for myself.
    And now I can't do it any more.
     
    dog, Datsolow, The Bobdogs and 2 others like this.
  14. I think the point is that making it a criminal activity doesn't stop people doing it, just turns them into criminals. The evidence suggests that there are more effective ways to control its use.
     
  15. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    It's a criminal activity to prevent people doing it, those that choose to do it risk being judged a criminal....that's how most laws work.

    Decriminalising something simply because people will do it anyway is not a reason for decriminalising it.

    If I choose to speed, and don't want to be classed as commiting a crime, then I don't speed, not expect them to decriminalise speeding.
     
    Lardy likes this.
  16. PSG

    PSG

    I smoked weed about 10 times a day from the age of 16-19 and I can safely say I am mental from it. Paranoid, loss of memory but still sexy so that's a bonus.
     
    Lardy, zed, Lord Congi and 1 other person like this.
  17. People say that the skunk that's most readily available these days is much stronger than the stuff that we grew up on....I disagree.....it's not so much the strength, but the affect it has...old school weed/sensi was quite light and made you think/laugh with equal measure....modern skunk is like a mental cosh IMO....it's akin to drinking champagne compared to Special Brew
     
  18. This seemed to be pretty much what the programme makers were saying, although they were making a distinction between hash and skunk specifically, I think that the effects of low grade weed would be more comparable to what they were describing as hash. I think they gave the participants a similar dose in terms of THC.

    The argument that the programme makers were making was that the availability of skunk could be limited if it was decriminalized and controlled, therefore limiting the drug's impact on society. I guess the question we need to be asking is whether laws are in place to protect people / society or to simply take the moral high ground.
     
  19. the argument for decriminalisationis is largely based on the cost of enforcement...it's very expensive to police
    the criminalisation argument turns on the notion that it will deter usage...all the current research available shows that this simply isn't the case.

    From a government's point of view, any substances likely to cause long term physical or psychological damage to those who use them, shouldn't really be encouraged....unless there's some serious revenue to be made from it's legalized useage (eg. alcohol, tobacco) and the social disbenefits and costs to the health system are outweighed by the income from taxes. Total hypocrisy
     
    tommygoldy and Jono1249 like this.
  20. Fair points mate.
    Personally I'd rather live in a world where those decisions good or bad are mine to make if it harms no one but myself, and mine to live with any consequences. Using intellect to justify legalisation is better than having no scientific or anecdotal evidence (excluding recent studies) to keep it criminalised for the last 40 or whatever years IMO.
    Regardless of differences of opinions the current situation is not working, criminals are still making a lot of money, casual users are being treated as criminals, users with health issues will still require NHS assistance, and the police are still under staffed. Surely legalisation and raising revenue from it is unlikely to bring the country to a grinding halt?
     
    zed and tommygoldy like this.

Share This Page