California, Proposition 19, freeing the weed !

[yorkie_chris]

On a separate note there was something on the radio where some lunatic of an academic was suggesting that crack cocaine is less damaging than alcohol.

I'm going to hunt him down and offer his daughter some crack and a bacardi breezer and see which annoys him more

Well one things for sure, if alcohol and cannabis switched roles in society (which obviously can/would never happen), im sure we'd have less car accidents, domestic violent, street brawls, etc.

Lives would be saved, and less mingers would get laid.

I'll stick to Prozac

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

On a separate note there was something on the radio where some lunatic of an academic was suggesting that crack cocaine is less damaging than alcohol.

I'm going to hunt him down and offer his daughter some crack and a bacardi breezer and see which annoys him more

The point was that certain substances cause less overall harm and if you think about it, the number of lives destroyed by crack in the UK every year is minimal, related to alcohol where the damage is vast.

The damage is caused because it is legal and socially acceptable.

Crack cocaine is a very harmful substance and very addictive. So it does seriously affect the lives of those on it and their families/dependants- but because it is stigmatised, it is less harmful overall because most people have the sense not to get involved.

Firstly, good thread no bitching just discussion, are you sure you havnt all been on the green? its all far too civilised in here - boooooooooooooooooo!

Originally Posted by Sid Squid

Agree in part, but then again there are people who abuse alcohol and suffer for it as does society around them. I don't see a difference.

+1 - is what I'd have responded with.

Originally Posted by Daimo

As I stated in the other post.

As a former smoker of 10 years of the herb, I can fully assure you that MOST full working weed smoking citizens would rather pay for it and get it legally

+1 im not proud nor ashamed that I like to have a smoke every now and then, nothing nicer than been completely knackered after a hectic few days. Getting the dog taking her for a walk and having a smoke before shower and bed for a fantastic nights sleep. Its great too if you've been out on the beer, come home have one, wake up hang over free - excellent!

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Surely then it's the fact that they were nutters in the first place then that cause them to start on hard drugs... not the cannabis.

+1000000000000
Those who use it as an escape/excuse then they're just hiding from the issues they have in the first place. For these people if it wasnt weed then it would likely be something else and in the end they'd end up in the same place.

Like Daimo said, his 40k plus friends who enjoy a smoke every now and then simarly I have friends in occupations you'd dread to think were anything other than squeeky clean. In truth they seem to be the most drug orentated people I know, doesnt change a thing. They're sucessful people and they do it all in moderation, why? becuase they're not idiots they do it for the fun not for the escape.

Originally Posted by Dave20046

I reckon it's the person, not the drug. Smackheads will get high on anything, it's just the odds are, amongst other things, they will have started with cannabis - one of the most readily available drugs.
I can imagine a baghead sort not being able to get hold of any, so needing the next thing they can get off their face with be it white lightning, cannabis, pills, glue. But I couldn't imagine the folk daimo refers to thinking "ah what the hell it's friday, I'm going to go shoot up and pass out behind lidl"

my point exactly. Its the person not the chemical.

Originally Posted by thedonal

The point was that certain substances cause less overall harm and if you think about it, the number of lives destroyed by crack in the UK every year is minimal, related to alcohol where the damage is vast.

The damage is caused because it is legal and socially acceptable.

Crack cocaine is a very harmful substance and very addictive. So it does seriously affect the lives of those on it and their families/dependants- but because it is stigmatised, it is less harmful overall because most people have the sense not to get involved.

But nobody could say cocaine is less harmful than alcohol, because it isn't. The reason less people die from cocaine, is because people are less inclined to go near it, because it's a more dangerous substance than alcohol (or many others).

It's like saying less people die from cyanide poisoning, so cyanide is less harmful than alcohol.

Cocaine is a much more dangerous drug than virtually most others, and if cocaine was used as much as alcohol was in society, there would be a lot more dead people.

[dizzyblonde]

Originally Posted by Daimo

Leads onto harder drugs my rear end... EXACTLY what the police sargent who pulled me in in my early 20's said. Ironically, I went on to work for one of the UK's largest law firms after, and i've never done anything harder.

I know a LOT of weed smokers, not one of them does anything harder. In fact, most had popped an e before smoking a joint.

So a crock of poop, written by someone who's read a paper and come to the same conclusion.

Oh, as for mental issues after giving up, also another load of poop. Half the above mentioned smokers who "grew out of it" have carried on to lead good law abiding lives. Im not going mad, if anything, im more sane now. But thats only because im more clear headed and active opposed to being monged and relaxed.

tbh, the worst part about it for me was waking up in the morning tired, and not being able to be recall certain things. But I smoked a lot of it.

Check me out, im injecting morphine now... In between mugging old ladies and stealing car stereo's.

Well FECK MEE, Daimo and myself actually agree about something

Originally Posted by thulfi

But nobody could say cocaine is less harmful than alcohol, because it isn't. The reason less people die from cocaine, is because people are less inclined to go near it, because it's a more dangerous substance than alcohol (or many others).

It's like saying less people die from cyanide poisoning, so cyanide is less harmful than alcohol.

Cocaine is a much more dangerous drug than virtually most others, and if cocaine was used as much as alcohol was in society, there would be a lot more dead people.

Why is cocaine physiologically more dangerous than, say alcohol or heroin?

Cocaine is VERY, VERY widely used (though on the decline). I'd say, on a physical harm basis, cocaine is probably similar to alcohol in some respects. It's more likely to cause a heart attack if too much is ingested in one go, but at the same time, alcohol poisoning is equally dangerous, not to mention the loss of control when you get hammered. Both can do a lot of damage to the liver.

One is legal (and marketed in some very insidious ways- think alcopops) and socially acceptable. The other isn't (depending on the crowds you hang around with!!).

Cocaine is WAY less addictive than opiates. And due to the purity of street cocaine these days (reportedly it's way down on the 90s, for example and even the 80s), the cutting agents (which are becoming bigger business now than the substances themselves) might be more likely to do you harm. Hence the decline of use (record hauls on our borders over recent years has also had an effect on this).

Of course cocaine is safer than cyanide. That's a completely irrelevant reference. So is any substance on the controlled list. The discussion in hand is the recreational use of substances, not comparison of popular drugs with deadly poisons.

IF cocaine were legalised (and I'm not necessarily calling for that), made to a decent, safe quality (it is used widely in many different medical products) and provided in a controlled manner (which would be more controlled than alcohol I expect), I believe that it would be less harmful than alcohol.

You would also reduce the amount of dangerous crime taken to get that substance into the hands of the public.

I will personally be very surprised if cannabis is legalised in California for two reasons-

First, the DEA are amazingly strict on drugs (the so called 'War on Drugs')- also, legalising it would be very clear evidence that they are losing this 'war'

Secondly, the USA like most countries in the world are signed up to international treaties on substance control and this might constitute a breach of such a treaty (depending on the terms of legalisation).

Originally Posted by Daimo

Leads onto harder drugs my rear end... EXACTLY what the police sargent who pulled me in in my early 20's said. Ironically, I went on to work for one of the UK's largest law firms after, and i've never done anything harder.

I know a LOT of weed smokers, not one of them does anything harder. In fact, most had popped an e before smoking a joint.

So a crock of poop, written by someone who's read a paper and come to the same conclusion.

Oh, as for mental issues after giving up, also another load of poop. Half the above mentioned smokers who "grew out of it" have carried on to lead good law abiding lives. Im not going mad, if anything, im more sane now. But thats only because im more clear headed and active opposed to being monged and relaxed.

tbh, the worst part about it for me was waking up in the morning tired, and not being able to be recall certain things. But I smoked a lot of it.

Check me out, im injecting morphine now... In between mugging old ladies and stealing car stereo's.

You do talk some crap! lol

First, the DEA are amazingly strict on drugs (the so called 'War on Drugs')- also, legalising it would be very clear evidence that they are losing this 'war'

What happens when your country is broke, 750 trillion owed to China. Idealogical wars tend to be the first to get binned. Besides they can easily argue it allows them to "concentrate" on the real hard drugs.

Secondly, the USA like most countries in the world are signed up to international treaties on substance control and this might constitute a breach of such a treaty (depending on the terms of legalisation).

Getting back to the original point at last. California has often gone its own way (think emission controls) only to be followed by other nations down the road. I think behind the scenes Western nations are gearing up for a sea change. Remember I said it first (little lie I read it in the Newscientist).