Cannabis haul! This is a Joke, Wake Up Smell the Beans

[femmefatale]

As has been previously stated multiple times one can find as substance enthralling without being controlled by it!!!

Posters have more or less suggested that they can't function or behave as they would like to without cannabis. They have discussed the lengths they go to to source it and large amounts of money they pay out. They have acknowledged that the cannabis they purchase and consume is most probably contaminated and poses a risk. I would say that they are in thrall to, and allowing their lives to be controlled and conditioned by, this substance.

[Cato]

Posters have more or less suggested that they can't function or behave as they would like to without cannabis. They have discussed the lengths they go to to source it and large amounts of money they pay out. They have acknowledged that the cannabis they purchase and consume is most probably contaminated and poses a risk. I would say that they are in thrall to, and allowing their lives to be controlled and conditioned by, this substance.

And, so what? Why is it any of the state's business?

[sarahj]

Posters have more or less suggested that they can't function or behave as they would like to without cannabis.

I don't think ANYONE made ANY of those claims.

Noone has stated that they cannot function or behave as they would like to without cannabis. I personally stated that I sleep better after smoking it, but that has been a problem since childhood.

They have discussed the lengths they go to to source it and large amounts of money they pay out.

Plenty of people go to lengths to source good olive oil. Does not mean they are addicted. Spending 500 euro on a bottle of champagne does not make you an addict either. Invalid argument.

They have acknowledged that the cannabis they purchase and consume is most probably contaminated and poses a risk.

Noone acknowledged that the cannabis we purchase or consume is contaminated. It is easy to recognise contaminated cannabis if you know what you are looking for. Then one DOES NOT buy that cannabis and instead looks for some better homegrown stuff. Another poor argument.

I would say that they are in thrall to, and allowing their lives to be controlled and conditioned by, this substance.

That is your opinion having read (or misread) some posts on this thread. How can you know who is controlled or conditioned by anything? I may think that you are controlled and conditioned by your Catholicism, but I don't make any accusations as I do not know you!

As has already been stated, one can very easily be enthralled with a substance without being addicted or controlled by it. Cannabis is a beautiful beautiful substance and I have no problem saying that. The first time I smoked it, a whole new way of looking at things was opened up to me...I am very grateful for that. It made me look at things in a closer, more open, more accepting yet questioning way. I am not controlled or conditioned by it - far from it. It is a substance which has allowed me to feel more free.

I cannot speak on behalf of anyone else on the last topic. Just as you should not have spoken on our behalf. If you have these (mis)conceptions about the drug which you are so convinced of, perhaps you should try it yourself? Empirical evidence IS best, after all.

[Monday Monday]

I would like to see the results of scientific work done by Dutch authorities about the health and societal effects of legalising cannabis. (If such research exists).

I’m surprised how little the Dutch experience informs the debate in Ireland and the UK. Is it because if the language difference I wonder.

Arguments about how much more harmful Alcohol is than cannabis don't make good reasons to legalise cannabis. More like reasons to prohibit alcohol.

What are the benefits of legalising cannabis for recreational use?

Legalising cannabis as a recreational drug along the lines of alcohol needs to stand in its own merits.

[femmefatale]

And, so what? Why is it any of the state's business?

Well, Cato, the sale/purchase of cannabis is currently illegal. Posters here want it decriminalized. They have to persuade policy-makers that cannabis is not a harmful substance or that the harm is such that decriminalization is still desirable and/or won't prove hazardous/problematic. In an effort to do this, many of the posters here have sought to paint cannabis in an extremely positive light. I don't think it is as positive as they suggest and I think an open and honest debate about decriminalization needs to face up to both the pros and the cons. Trying to pretend that cannabis is benign little thing people dip in and out of over the course of their lives, is misleading and frustrates the kind of proper debate which may or may not culminate in legalization.

[sarahj]

I would like to see the results of scientific work done by Dutch authorities about the health and societal effects of legalising cannabis. (If such research exists).

I’m surprised how little the Dutch experience informs the debate in Ireland and the UK. Is it because if the language difference I wonder.

Arguments about how much more harmful Alcohol is than cannabis don't make good reasons to legalise cannabis. More like reasons to prohibit alcohol.

What are the benefits of legalising cannabis for recreational use?

Legalising cannabis as a recreational drug along the lines of alcohol needs to stand in its own merits.

Research can be a very funny business. Even if research is undertaken in the Netherlands, any Irish review of literature in the area would probably ignore it. It would have to be a very indepth systematic review to be counted and, even at that, if a translator was not available, it would be discounted.

I will search a little for Dutch reports and get back to you. See what I can find.

[Cato]

Well, Cato, the sale/purchase of cannabis is currently illegal. Posters here want it decriminalized. They have to persuade policy-makers that cannabis is not a harmful substance or that the harm is such that decriminalization is still desirable and/or won't prove hazardous/problematic. In an effort to do this, many of the posters here have sought to paint cannabis in an extremely positive light. I don't think it is as positive as they suggest and I think an open and honest debate about decriminalization needs to face up to both the pros and the cons. Trying to pretend that cannabis is benign little thing people dip in and out of over the course of their lives, is misleading and frustrates the kind of proper debate which may or may not culminate in legalization.

Frankly Femme, that's just blah, blah, blah... It is not an answer to my question, and I note the avoidance with interest.

[truthisfree]

And, so what? Why is it any of the state's business?

If I understand where you are coming from Cato, It is none of the states business whatsoever what I do in the privacy of my home. Unfortunately we have a state that is ...well, am stuck for words to describe what we have.

What you probably mean is that we need a complete change of politic that would allow personal freedom to make choices, what we have is a state that allows people to make choices and then punishes them for that choice, albeit a lot of state people employed in this ridiculously expensive and filed prohibition.

Whether it is possible to change this one small thing, or better to concentrate on changing the entire system. I am listening as I am interested in what is the best way to tackle this.

I am of the opinion that the best I can do as an individual is try to make small changes at a time, but I could be wrong easily and there may well be no hope of changing one small part.

[sarahj]

Well, Cato, the sale/purchase of cannabis is currently illegal. Posters here want it decriminalized. They have to persuade policy-makers that cannabis is not a harmful substance or that the harm is such that decriminalization is still desirable and/or won't prove hazardous/problematic. In an effort to do this, many of the posters here have sought to paint cannabis in an extremely positive light. I don't think it is as positive as they suggest and I think an open and honest debate about decriminalization needs to face up to both the pros and the cons. Trying to pretend that cannabis is benign little thing people dip in and out of over the course of their lives, is misleading and frustrates the kind of proper debate which may or may not culminate in legalization.

Seriously femme?! How can you be so sure of anything with cannabis when you appear to never have taken it yourself, nor do you know anyone who takes it??? It really confuses me that you are so certain of these "cons" having had no personal experience with the drug.

It would be like me asserting that chewing coca leaf is bad for people on the basis of some scaremongering whispers I have heard without trying the plant or having contact with people who take it regularly.

Where is your evidence?

[sarahj]

If I understand where you are coming from Cato, It is none of the states business whatsoever what I do in the privacy of my home. Unfortunately we have a state that is ...well, am stuck for words to describe what we have.

Nanny state?

What you probably mean is that we need a complete change of politic that would allow personal freedom to make choices, what we have is a state that allows people to make choices and then punishes them for that choice, albeit a lot of state people employed in this ridiculously expensive and filed prohibition.

Whether it is possible to change this one small thing, or better to concentrate on changing the entire system. I am listening as I am interested in what is the best way to tackle this.

I am of the opinion that the best I can do as an individual is try to make small changes at a time, but I could be wrong easily and there may well be no hope of changing one small part.

I guess we should fight for the freedom to do what doesn't affect others. That is my position anyway - that should be the general position and the cannabis issue is just one specific aspect.