Cannabis IS dangerous: The Independent

[Bozo Erectus]

Anybody who goes for drug treatment for pot is a complete ass, and would probably have some other dumb problem at that same moment, even if he'd never taken a puff in his life. Anyway, if we're going to demonize things based on how many experience problems, then alcohol far and away is the greatest threat facing society, not heroin, not ecstacy, not cocaine and certainly not pot. Cigarettes and booze have killed more people, directly and indirectly than all the wars ever fought combined. Why isnt the Independent therefore leading a crusade to have them made illegal?

 

[Kozmos]

I'm sorry but heroin tops alcohol in every way.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Cleric, how so?

 

[Kozmos]

It messes up people. It messes them up real bad. Permanently even. Alcohol is less severe and it's usually applied in good company. Heroin well.....nothing good can come out of it.

 

[Mega Tsunami]

That to me is a good reason to legalise cannabis... with legality comes regulation.

Well we have legalisation and regulation of alcohol and tobacco and look where that has got us…

Only if they put 25x more weed in a joint.

Apparently not – have a read of this taken from my links. Read it all but I have emboldened a section to show you how it is more concentrated now.

The skunk smoked by the majority of young Britons bears no relation to traditional cannabis resin - with a 25-fold increase in the amount of the main psychoactive ingredient, tetrahydrocannabidinol (THC), typically found in the early 1990s. New research being published in this week's Lancet will show how cannabis is more dangerous than LSD and ecstasy
<snip>
Yet Lucy was not smoking the traditional cannabis beloved and introduced en masse by Britain's Sixties youth. It was skunk - a form of cannabis so powerful that experts are warning it can be 25 times more powerful than the cannabis used by previous generations. Growing new strains of cannabis under ultra-violet lights, dealers have been able to intensify the quantity of the chemical tetrahydrocannabidinol (THC) - a psycho-active compound that disrupts brain activity and distorts sensory perceptions

 

[Mega Tsunami]

Anybody who goes for drug treatment for pot is a complete ass, and would probably have some other dumb problem at that same moment, even if he'd never taken a puff in his life. Anyway, if we're going to demonize things based on how many experience problems, then alcohol far and away is the greatest threat facing society, not heroin, not ecstacy, not cocaine and certainly not pot. Cigarettes and booze have killed more people, directly and indirectly than all the wars ever fought combined. Why isnt the Independent therefore leading a crusade to have them made illegal?

This is hardly a crusade against cannabis. This is a newspaper saying that 10 years ago they lead a crusade in Britain to legalise the stuff which resulted in Britain declassifying it.
And now they are saying “Hey, we admit we got it wrong big time and no longer think it should be legalised.”
In defence they add the sub-text that way-back-when, cannabis was much weaker than it is now.

In case you don’t know – the Independent is a well respected liberal broadsheet newspaper that has probably upset many of its readers by ‘coming out’ like this.

 

[Truronian]

Well we have legalisation and regulation of alcohol and tobacco and look where that has got us…

Where ?

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

It messes up people. It messes them up real bad. Permanently even. Alcohol is less severe and it's usually applied in good company. Heroin well.....nothing good can come out of it.

I think he meant the total effects to society. A lot more people drink alcohol.

 

[LucyDuke]

It's never good when people judge things they don't understand. The author of that article is sadly confused.

Record numbers of teenagers are requiring drug treatment as a result of smoking skunk, the highly potent cannabis strain that is 25 times stronger than resin sold a decade ago.

The vast majority of people who go into drug treatment for marijuana use alone were compelled to, whether by family or the judicial system. The panic about increased potency is also fallacious. As anyone familiar with cannabis will tell you, increased potency means decreased consumption.

The skunk smoked by the majority of young Britons bears no relation to traditional cannabis resin - with a 25-fold increase in the amount of the main psychoactive ingredient, tetrahydrocannabidinol (THC), typically found in the early 1990s.

This is the same alarmist nonsense. A 25-fold increase is misleading at best, and untrue at worst. And again, an increase in potency does not lead to increased effects (excepting an initial trial).

New research being published in this week's Lancet will show how cannabis is more dangerous than LSD and ecstasy.

That's oversimplified. The risks of those drugs are wildly different, but to suggest that a cannabinoid is plainly "more dangerous" than an amphetamine is laughable.

I realize I'm not going to convince anyone that doesn't want to face reality, nor do I want to. Just pointing out the most obvious problems with that article to those who care. Otherwise... don't judge what you clearly don't understand.

 

[punkbass2000]

And how would you do that?

If the government is selling it, they can control the THC content.

 

[punkbass2000]

This is the same alarmist nonsense. A 25-fold increase is misleading at best, and untrue at worst. And again, an increase in potency does not lead to increased effects (excepting an initial trial).

Exactly. Given that normal marijuana is about 4&#37; THC, this would mean that the current strains are 100%.
This article is clearly bunk.

 

[ComradeDavo]

If the problem is that the cannibas being smoked is too strong, then legalise it and regulate the strength.

 

[Tycoon101]

Doesn't really change my opionion. Just because its dangerous. Doesn't mean it should be illegal. In fact making it legal is likely to reduce the danger because the drug can be more regulated

As others have said...legalize cannabis, you can regulate things like THC content, and better control it. Ban it, and you lose what control legalization affords you.

That to me is a good reason to legalise cannabis... with legality comes regulation.

If the government is selling it, they can control the THC content.

Isn't ILLEGALITY the most powerful form of regulation?

 

[ComradeDavo]

Isn't ILLEGALITY the most powerful form of regulation?

Of curse not. Not unless you put a camera on the side of every single perasons head so you can see whether they are growing it or not.

 

[Tycoon101]

Of curse not. Not unless you put a camera on the side of every single perasons head so you can see whether they are growing it or not.

The government says that "_____" is illicit within the country. The fact that "_____" is illegal gives the Law sufficient reason to incarcerate you. Thus the sale and consumption of "_____" is regulated to the point where it is not intended to be within any households.

 

[Evie]

Because, unless you are foolishly naive, people are going to do it ANYWAY, illegal or not. Makig it illegal doesn't prevent people from smoking pot ; it simply allows you to punish the one pot smoker out of fifty or a hundred the police actually manages to catch.

If you allow the sales of pot, then you can regulate it (IE, "pot may only be sold in specified locations ; each brand must obtain a permit from the FDA that it is within acceptable limits as to THC contents, etc.")

Sure, you'll still have a black market, but it will be significantly smaller, and the vast majority of people interested in pot will switch to the legal brands (as long as there is no over-the-top ridiculous price-jacking), as with alcohol and cigarettes.

 

[Mercenary82]

Stronger marijuana just means people will smoke less to get high. So it actually would be better for health than smoking poor quality skunk, where people may have to smoke 10 times as many joints to get the same high, resulting in more lung damage.

 

[Truronian]

Isn't ILLEGALITY the most powerful form of regulation?

No, illegality is known as banning.

 

[punkbass2000]

Isn't ILLEGALITY the most powerful form of regulation?

No, of course not.

 

[punkbass2000]

The government says that "_____" is illicit within the country. The fact that "_____" is illegal gives the Law sufficient reason to incarcerate you. Thus the sale and consumption of "_____" is regulated to the point where it is not intended to be within any households.

Which makes it highly valuable and gives people reason to do it without being found out. If it's regulated, the cost is much lower and thus not worth the risk for a criminal to do it undercover.