The London Mayor...

[Odds]

Making something legal does not introduce control. We still have alcoholics and smoking related health problems.

Citizen Khan is proposing decriminalisation of mild cannabis; not the more toxic Skunk strain.

If you are suggesting that something should be legal, because its use is widespread, then perhaps there should be no speed limits, parking fines etc.

The problem with modern weed is the increased potency: such as increasing the power of a car compared to the 60s, cannabis has increased many times the power of affect it has. Back in the day it really was Sweet (Mary-Jane), a subtle, fruity, flavour with a sweet aroma that was mild and mellow. Fast forward thirty years when Skunk appeared and it'd become a very different plant altogether: bitter, harsh with a rank odour.

Just as some folk want faster cars with more power, then they also demand a faster, higher hit...throw in the need for increased profit in a factory setting, rather than the cottage industry it once was, and the toxic affect on society overwhelms any area where it takes root.

Decriminalisation has shown it works, and nobody is proposing full legalisation.

 

[Highway Man]

I look upon someone who smokes weed the same as someone who takes acid. They are druggies in my eyes and I think it should stay ilegal to casually use it. The only people who want to decriminilise it are those that take it. I may have an old outlook on the subject but I see no benefit to make it even more widely available to those who do not use it already.

 

[Odds]

That's a bit like saying drinking a pint or two of an evening is the same as necking a bottle of vodka before lunch.

 

[Highway Man]

That's a bit like saying drinking a pint or two of an evening is the same as necking a bottle of vodka before lunch.

No it isnt, nothing like saying that.

 

[IT Minion]

Making something legal does not introduce control. We still have alcoholics and smoking related health problems.

If you are suggesting that something should be legal, because its use is widespread, then perhaps there should be no speed limits, parking fines etc.

We control the quality and strength of alcohol. We control the sale of it to try to minimise sales to minors. These minimise the harm of alcohol.

Although for alcohol if it were banned it would probably be safer even with the people inevitably killing themselves drinking methanol because it's just that bad for you. The risk profile is closer to heroin than marijuana.

I'm arguing that it is widespread and less dangerous than other comparable drugs that are not illegal.

 

[Odds]

I look upon someone who smokes weed the same as someone who takes acid. They are druggies in my eyes and I think it should stay ilegal to casually use it.

That's a bit like saying drinking a pint or two of an evening is the same as necking a bottle of vodka before lunch.

The only people who want to decriminilise it are those that take it.

Are you suggesting the London Mayor tokes up after a hard day at t'office?

I may have an old outlook on the subject but I see no benefit to make it even more widely available to those who do not use it already.

Decriminalisation doesn't go that far. Fewer folk smoke these days meaning it's less likely they'll take up the habit.

No it isnt, nothing like saying that.

yes, it is.

 

[ajrtd]

Citizen Khan is proposing decriminalisation of mild cannabis; not the more toxic Skunk strain.

How can that be policed. Do dealers offer less powerful dope.

 

[Odds]

How can that be policed. Do dealers offer less powerful dope.

Our ‘modest proposal’ is that the possession of drugs that are controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 should be decriminalised by repealing subsections 5(1) and 5(2) of the Act (Douse et al., 2022). Subsection 5(1) makes it unlawful to possess controlled substances, except in circumstances permitted by regulations authorised by the Secretary of State.1 Subsection 5(2) makes such possession a criminal offence. Subsection 5(3) makes it an offence to possess these substances with intent to supply them to another person. Our modest proposal does not extend to the repeal of subsection 5(3), neither does it include what is often referred to as legalisation. This would involve the removal of criminal offences of importation, production, or supply of these substances.

Do the research@Journals.sage.pub

 

[Highway Man]

That's a bit like saying drinking a pint or two of an evening is the same as necking a bottle of vodka before lunch.



Are you suggesting the London Mayor tokes up after a hard day at t'office?



Decriminalisation doesn't go that far. Fewer folk smoke these days meaning it's less likely they'll take up the habit.


yes, it is.

I have no idea what the London Mayor does after a hard day at the office,
Drinking vodka or beer is not t he same as smoking weed, you dont have to go on the streets to buy vodka or beer through underhand ways.
fewer people smoke conventional cigs maybe, but those who smoke weed do not necessarily smoke cigs.
No it isnt.

 

[noseall]

Making something legal does not introduce control. We still have alcoholics and smoking related health problems.

Good job fag's and booze are taxed to bu99ery, so that we can pay for their treatment then, innit.

 

[motorbiking]

We get £8bn tax and it costs us £13bn. We also lose about £2bn a year in tax from dodgy imports.

If people want to legally melt their brains with weed, I imagine the productivity cost would be a lot higher vs the tax. Not to mention that it wouldn't stop illegal "tax free" supplies.

 

[IT Minion]

We get £8bn tax and it costs us £13bn. We also lose about £2bn a year in tax from dodgy imports.

If people want to legally melt their brains with weed, I imagine the productivity cost would be a lot higher vs the tax. Not to mention that it wouldn't stop illegal "tax free" supplies.

It would be like cigarettes. Most people pay for legal ones rather than dodgy ones.

And yes, cigarettes are awful. But we as a nation don't think the pain of banning them and the restrictions in our liberties is acceptable. Even if they kill people in painful and expensive ways.

Why would the productivity cost go up? If you get hammered then you're useless the next morning. If you smoke weed then you just wake up and go to work.

 

[Odds]

I have no idea what the London Mayor does after a hard day at the office,
Drinking vodka or beer is not t he same as smoking weed, you dont have to go on the streets to buy vodka or beer through underhand ways.
fewer people smoke conventional cigs maybe, but those who smoke weed do not necessarily smoke cigs.
No it isnt.

smoking cannabis isn't the same as dropping acid, either.
You started the uneven comparisons.

 

[motorbiking]

It would be like cigarettes. Most people pay for legal ones rather than dodgy ones.

And yes, cigarettes are awful. But we as a nation don't think the pain of banning them and the restrictions in our liberties is acceptable. Even if they kill people in painful and expensive ways.

Why would the productivity cost go up? If you get hammered then you're useless the next morning. If you smoke weed then you just wake up and go to work.

Because even light use has long term affects on the brain.

Cannabis use can have both short-term and long-term effects on the brain, potentially impacting cognitive functions and mental health. Short-term effects can include impairments in thinking, attention, memory, coordination, and movement. Long-term effects, especially in individuals who start using cannabis before age 18, may include problems with attention, memory, problem-solving, and behavior. Additionally, regular cannabis use has been linked to a decline in cognitive abilities and changes in brain structure and function

Nobody ever performed better with less memory, and poorer problem solving and decision making ability.

 

[ReganAndCarter]

: the city has become a dump and there are zero police officers in sight, ZERO.

They're all on their computers monitoring our posts on here.