Officer sniffs out cannabis farm (From Evesham Journal)

We need to stop this stupid and unwinnable war against cannabis. It is causing far more harm to our communities than it prevents. If we had a properly regulated system of production and supply we'd have no more illegal cannabis farms, instead we'd have thousands of new jobs. We'd have no more dealers on the streets. Cannabis would be available to adults only through licensed outlets and we'd have some control over the THC and CBD content.

Doctors would be able to prescribe one of the most effective medicines that has no serious side effects at all. At the moment the government has given GW Pharmaceuticals an illegal monopoly on cannabis so they make millions out of a medicine that you can grow in your greenhouse for virtually nothing.

If we introduced a legally regulated system we would solve nearly all the problems around cannabis. Science proves how much safer it is than tobacco, alcohol, prescription medicines and all other recreational drugs. If anyone does have a problem with it they could get help without having to confess to a crime.

CLEAR published independent, expert research last year which shows that a tax and regulate policy on cannabis would produce a net gain to the UK economy of up to £9.3 billion per annum.

It is a scandal that our government, our judges, our courts, our police and our newspapers keep misleading us about cannabis. Find out the truth for yourself and wake up to the lies you have been told.

Another injustice in the UK.

UK Government issues licence to GW Pharmaceuticals for the growing of skunk... yet this same 'benevolent' government claims "Cannabis has no medicinal value whatsoever"

Double-standards in the UK, where corporations, bankers and politicians can do crime and get paid for it... while the ordinary citizen is branded a criminal for life.

UK is rotten from the top down! The cannabis laws are false laws based on lies. The UK government is clearly not benevolent.

The really terrible part is that most of the police and the crown prosecution know that these cannabis laws are false yet still they arrest ordinary citizens... this is a crime.

Pardon and free all cannabis prisoners, strike the records clean and pay compensation for the lives that have been ruined through false laws.

UK is disgrace for treating it's people so poorly.

"It's been a successful operation and resulted from excellent initiative and follow up work by some of our officers."

Cannabis is medicine, and destroying such a thing is disgraceful, couldnt the police at least donate half the crop to scientists and professors who want to continue research on its medicinal value? We know its medicine, as GW pharma grow thousands of high grade cannabis sensimilla (seedless) AKA 'skunk'. They grow it in Kent, the government allows them to sell it at extortionate prices. Its the most expensive cannabis in the world 10 times more expensive than street cannabis. Why dont the police kick their door down? But they do with personal grow ops or even large ones? Well if everyone could grow this medicine in their back garden for next to nothing, that poses a financial threat to GW pharma. So the reasons why its illegal have nothing to do with its potential for harm.

Professor Terrie Moffitt, from the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London, said:

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.”

Like flies to a jam jar!

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

The truth about cannabis needs to be told.

At present our government is wasting over £9 billion pa on a policy that causes more harm than it prevents.

Closing that kind of farm is like taking away few beers from a local off-licence. With about 3 tonnes of cannabis used every single day in the UK that is hardly a success, but rather disgraceful waste of tax-payers money and Police time.

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then?

Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

We must not be to Harsh on people who are only believing the lies they have been feed for decades. Cannabis is not a harmful drug. Since it's first discovery it has killed zero people. Obviously smoking has negative side effects especially when mixed with tobacco. Please I beg people before they condemn cannabis is to research it properly and try not to take what the Times says as gospel.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

My final word on the subject: one of my best friends died after he bacame psychotic through heavy cannabis use. I understand the dangers of its use.
Don't lecture me about drugs, I've made it my business to know an awful lot about them. I lived with users for many years, I saw the effects that drugs of many kinds had on them and as a result I don't support their legalisation.

Maggie Would wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

My final word on the subject: one of my best friends died after he bacame psychotic through heavy cannabis use. I understand the dangers of its use.
Don't lecture me about drugs, I've made it my business to know an awful lot about them. I lived with users for many years, I saw the effects that drugs of many kinds had on them and as a result I don't support their legalisation.

Nobody who has any real experience or understanding of drugs and drug users would fall into the classic trap of inventing a causal path from cannabis through psychosis to death.

I'm sorry if you've had bad experiences but don't pretend you know what you're talking about when you quite obviously don't.

Cannabis is not without its issues and problems, either - http://m.bjp.rcpsych
.org/content/178/2/1
01.full

Babs Stanley wrote:
We need to stop this stupid and unwinnable war against cannabis. It is causing far more harm to our communities than it prevents. If we had a properly regulated system of production and supply we'd have no more illegal cannabis farms, instead we'd have thousands of new jobs. We'd have no more dealers on the streets. Cannabis would be available to adults only through licensed outlets and we'd have some control over the THC and CBD content.

Doctors would be able to prescribe one of the most effective medicines that has no serious side effects at all. At the moment the government has given GW Pharmaceuticals an illegal monopoly on cannabis so they make millions out of a medicine that you can grow in your greenhouse for virtually nothing.

If we introduced a legally regulated system we would solve nearly all the problems around cannabis. Science proves how much safer it is than tobacco, alcohol, prescription medicines and all other recreational drugs. If anyone does have a problem with it they could get help without having to confess to a crime.

CLEAR published independent, expert research last year which shows that a tax and regulate policy on cannabis would produce a net gain to the UK economy of up to £9.3 billion per annum.

It is a scandal that our government, our judges, our courts, our police and our newspapers keep misleading us about cannabis. Find out the truth for yourself and wake up to the lies you have been told.

CLEAR - would that be the former 'Legalise Cannabis Alliance! by any chance? They'll be impartial then!

Maggie Would wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

My final word on the subject: one of my best friends died after he bacame psychotic through heavy cannabis use. I understand the dangers of its use.
Don't lecture me about drugs, I've made it my business to know an awful lot about them. I lived with users for many years, I saw the effects that drugs of many kinds had on them and as a result I don't support their legalisation.

Sorry i have to agree with Babs Stanley on this one. There is no proven causal link between cannabis and psychosis. And psychosis cannot cause death. My heart goes out to you, but i cannot believe cannabis was the cause. Simply because millions and millions of people have used cannabis for over 5000 years. If it gave everyone psychosis and then killed them, mankind would of naturally discarded the plant. I would like you to show me some scientific research (not opinion) or a study that proves cannabis causes psychosis. Im not for one second suggesting cannabis is harmless, but to put it in perspective, its safer than paracetamol and most legal drugs people take everyday. Not just that, the CBD found in well grown cannabis is an anti psychotic cannabinoid, and CBD rich cannabis strains are prescribed to people who suffer from mental health problems such as psychosis and schizophrenia. Your friend may have had underline problems, its easier to blame the weed than to find out what the causation really was. Like i said cannabis is not harmless, but its safer than alcohol, tobacco, about as harmful as caffeine. But anyone who sits there smoking weed all day with no CBD, because criminals dont care when growing, it wont do any good for someone with pre-existing problems. If cannabis is so dangerous as you prohibitionists say, why are you comfy with the market being controlled by criminals, who dont ask for ID?

Lets be clear, the demand for cannabis wont go away, so neither will the supply, regardless of the legality. But when prohibited, the only people in society willing to risk freedom for money, are criminals. The demand wont go away because its illegal, after all its been there for over 5000 years. Children find cannabis easier to obtain than alcohol and tobacco even with those legal drugs being so poorly regulated, simply because the control has been 'gifted' to criminals. And dealers dont ask for ID, which is dangerous.

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London, 2012

Didnt need a professor to tell you cannabis is harmful for kids, but what you should know is when a country legally regulates cannabis, the use goes down along with associated crime, and age of first use goes up. Because they control and regulate the cannabis market instead of pretending there isnt an issue, indirectly leaving criminals in charge. Prohibition is harmful.

"The lesson has already been learned with alcohol prohibition. We tried to engineer an alcohol-free society and ended up with huge criminal enterprises, government corruption, children lured into organized crime and random violence that took the lives of countless innocent people."
- Kurt Schmoke, Mayor of Baltimore

I know for a fact that if cannabis was legally regulated your friend would of been prescribed high CBD cannabis strains. Which has been scientifically proven to reduce symptoms of psychosis, schizophrenia and panic/anxiety/eating
/sleeping disorders safely and effectively with no negative side effect.

ac1250 wrote:
Cannabis is not without its issues and problems, either - http://m.bjp.rcpsych

.org/content/178/2/1

01.full

so still safer than alcohol then....even so, don't support a policy that gifts criminals the control over the cannabis market, if it has a potential for harm.

Abusing Mcdonalds, can lead to heart problems, obesity and death, yet we dont prohibit snacks and jail unhealthy dieters.

In countries that legally regulate cannabis, (Holland, Canada, Israel, 18 States in the US and more) the natural buds get sold to people covering a wide range of psychological/physic
al problems.

Its proven to not just be safer than alcohol, but tobacco and most pharmaceutical drugs. In fact its so low in toxicity it stays in the human body for up to a month, the body doesn't reject it as quick as alcohol or aspirin. The cannabinoids in cannabis are chemically identical to the ones we naturally have inside us. There is no other plant like it. The best thing is it doesn't need synthesizing or extracting for it to become the medicine it is (Unlike Heroine). Just grow it like tomatoes then harvest the flowers.

The reasons why its illegal have nothing to do with its potential for harm.

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London, 2012

The Doosra wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:
We need to stop this stupid and unwinnable war against cannabis. It is causing far more harm to our communities than it prevents. If we had a properly regulated system of production and supply we'd have no more illegal cannabis farms, instead we'd have thousands of new jobs. We'd have no more dealers on the streets. Cannabis would be available to adults only through licensed outlets and we'd have some control over the THC and CBD content.

Doctors would be able to prescribe one of the most effective medicines that has no serious side effects at all. At the moment the government has given GW Pharmaceuticals an illegal monopoly on cannabis so they make millions out of a medicine that you can grow in your greenhouse for virtually nothing.

If we introduced a legally regulated system we would solve nearly all the problems around cannabis. Science proves how much safer it is than tobacco, alcohol, prescription medicines and all other recreational drugs. If anyone does have a problem with it they could get help without having to confess to a crime.

CLEAR published independent, expert research last year which shows that a tax and regulate policy on cannabis would produce a net gain to the UK economy of up to £9.3 billion per annum.

It is a scandal that our government, our judges, our courts, our police and our newspapers keep misleading us about cannabis. Find out the truth for yourself and wake up to the lies you have been told.

CLEAR - would that be the former 'Legalise Cannabis Alliance! by any chance? They'll be impartial then!

The Independent Drug Monitoring Unit. Biggest customer, the Crown Prosecution Service.

http://www.clear-uk.
org/wp-content/uploa
ds/2011/09/TaxUKCan.
pdf

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese


l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then?

Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...).
They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese



l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then?

Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...).
They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

Kidney failure, internal bleeding, stomach ulcers, acidosis, death.........oh sorry, that's Aspirin! In the US 20,000 die every year from taking Aspirin, 100,000 end up in hospital having taken Aspirin (research from Eastern Virginia Medical School)

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote: Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then? Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...). They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

Well Said

As a former user/abuser it saddens me to see current users being so quick to defend it. Yet they are the same people that couldnt give it up for a month to realise the affects it has on you. They always know better. See how you look at it with a completely sober mind with no goverment Propaganda involved.

Nikrem wrote:

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote: Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then? Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...). They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

Well Said

As a former user/abuser it saddens me to see current users being so quick to defend it. Yet they are the same people that couldnt give it up for a month to realise the affects it has on you. They always know better. See how you look at it with a completely sober mind with no goverment Propaganda involved.

And the evidence for these wild, hysterical and inaccurate assertions?

Babs Stanley wrote:

Nikrem wrote:

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote: Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then? Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...). They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

Well Said

As a former user/abuser it saddens me to see current users being so quick to defend it. Yet they are the same people that couldnt give it up for a month to realise the affects it has on you. They always know better. See how you look at it with a completely sober mind with no goverment Propaganda involved.

And the evidence for these wild, hysterical and inaccurate assertions?

When speaking to a former user/abuser you should be more respectful.
After Babs Stanley, I am here presenting myself as a former user/abuser too between the ages of 15-37.
That's not being wild or hysterical.
The evidence you asked you will never get because it is essentially with me and people I love.
But it will not be hard to find me if you want too.
Ah, I am forgetting, I once had the same arguments you have now. You are three decades late...

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

Nikrem wrote:

mauro balbino wrote:

Babs Stanley wrote:

The Doosra wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote: Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

Maybe if you understood the dangers of the drug, you would have something useful to say.

What are the dangers then? Remember, what the Daily Mail says doesn't count. Let's talk scientific evidence shall we?

Psychotic episodes, schizophrenia, addictive production of serotonin, loss of concentration and memory, depression, low self-esteem (...). They are the obvious ones, but the range is very wide and the consequences can be tragic.

Well Said

As a former user/abuser it saddens me to see current users being so quick to defend it. Yet they are the same people that couldnt give it up for a month to realise the affects it has on you. They always know better. See how you look at it with a completely sober mind with no goverment Propaganda involved.

And the evidence for these wild, hysterical and inaccurate assertions?

When speaking to a former user/abuser you should be more respectful.
After Babs Stanley, I am here presenting myself as a former user/abuser too between the ages of 15-37.
That's not being wild or hysterical.
The evidence you asked you will never get because it is essentially with me and people I love.
But it will not be hard to find me if you want too.
Ah, I am forgetting, I once had the same arguments you have now. You are three decades late...

So no evidence then, except your personal opinion.

I see.

Perhaps you should look at what the NHS says about the health harms of cannabis?

http://www.nta.nhs.u
k/uploads/healthharm
sfinal-v1.pdf

Source: NHS
Link: http://www.nta.nhs.u
k/uploads/healthharm
sfinal-v1.pdf

(from page 31)

5.1 Acute adverse effects associated with the use of cannabis

"PSYCHOLOGICAL/PSYCH
IATRIC"

Organic/neurological

• perceptual distortion (hallucinations)
• amnesia/forgetfulnes
s
• confusion of thought processes, impaired
judgement
Personality/mood
• the effects of cannabis upon mental state vary
considerably between individuals; determined
by dose, route of administration, expectations,
concomitant use of other drugs, emotional
state, and psychiatric illness:
– temporary psychological distress
(especially naive users)
– low mood (dysphoria)
– anxiety
– confusion
– drowsiness
– depression
– panic attacks
– agitation
– symptoms indicative of a persistent and
pervasive elevated (euphoric) or irritable
mood (hypomanic symptoms)
– short-lived and reversible psychotic
reaction
Synthetic cannabinoids
Organic/neurological

• suggestion that overdose could include
significant alterations in mental state with
paranoia and perceptual distortions

"MORBIDITY"
Acute intoxication
• irritant effects of smoke on the respiratory
system (coughing, sore throat and
bronchospasm among people with asthma)
• facial flushing
• abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting
• can cause an increase in heart rate
(tachycardia) and in some cases increased
blood pressure (hypertension)
• difficulty in motor co-ordination and
performance
Synthetic cannabinoids
• not documented, limited evidence base

mauro balbino wrote:
Source: NHS
Link: http://www.nta.nhs.u

k/uploads/healthharm

sfinal-v1.pdf

(from page 31)

5.1 Acute adverse effects associated with the use of cannabis

"PSYCHOLOGICAL/
PSYCH
IATRIC"

Organic/neurological


• perceptual distortion (hallucinations)
• amnesia/forgetfulnes

s
• confusion of thought processes, impaired
judgement
Personality/mood
• the effects of cannabis upon mental state vary
considerably between individuals; determined
by dose, route of administration, expectations,
concomitant use of other drugs, emotional
state, and psychiatric illness:
– temporary psychological distress
(especially naive users)
– low mood (dysphoria)
– anxiety
– confusion
– drowsiness
– depression
– panic attacks
– agitation
– symptoms indicative of a persistent and
pervasive elevated (euphoric) or irritable
mood (hypomanic symptoms)
– short-lived and reversible psychotic
reaction
Synthetic cannabinoids
Organic/neurological


• suggestion that overdose could include
significant alterations in mental state with
paranoia and perceptual distortions

"MORBIDITY"
Acute intoxication
• irritant effects of smoke on the respiratory
system (coughing, sore throat and
bronchospasm among people with asthma)
• facial flushing
• abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting
• can cause an increase in heart rate
(tachycardia) and in some cases increased
blood pressure (hypertension)
• difficulty in motor co-ordination and
performance
Synthetic cannabinoids
• not documented, limited evidence base

Now compare those with the harms of the other drugs in the same document and get things into perspective

I could compare them to other drugs, traffic accidents or atomic bombs. But the article, arguments & evidences were about cannabis production/use.
Look, Babs, to keep things in perspective we should proceed with Logic and follow its methods.
We just disagree and I wish you the best. Take good care of yourself ;-)

CLEAR is an organisation set up by cannabis users to tell everybody how wonderful cannabis is. It's rather like a bunch of alcholics getting together to tell everyone how wonderful alcohol is. My own opinion is that anyone who uses cannabis is a complete and utter idiot. As are people who still smoke and drink too much.
A friend of my wife, some time back, made a video recording of her husband and some of his friends using cannabis. They thought the cannabis was helping them to have intelligent and meaningful discussion and conversation. The video showed otherwise. When I saw it I could not stop laughing at their antics and attempts at "meaningful" conversation. As regards her husband, he hasn't touched cannabis since he saw the video.

Omicron wrote:
CLEAR is an organisation set up by cannabis users to tell everybody how wonderful cannabis is. It's rather like a bunch of alcholics getting together to tell everyone how wonderful alcohol is. My own opinion is that anyone who uses cannabis is a complete and utter idiot. As are people who still smoke and drink too much.
A friend of my wife, some time back, made a video recording of her husband and some of his friends using cannabis. They thought the cannabis was helping them to have intelligent and meaningful discussion and conversation. The video showed otherwise. When I saw it I could not stop laughing at their antics and attempts at "meaningful" conversation. As regards her husband, he hasn't touched cannabis since he saw the video.

Are you stupid. Iv been on the clear website and it states that cannabis is NOT harmless. It also states how medicinal it is, and compares the harms to legal drugs and always comes out to be the safest. No one is saying its harmless, but compared to aspirin, and most pharmaceuticals, it is harmless relatively.

SO any one who uses cannabis is an idiot? So any one who uses caffeine, alcohol, tobacco and aspirin is an idiot? Those drugs are way more harmful than cannabis apart from caffeine which is said to pose similar harms. You have no idea about the scientific research done on cannabis, the history and the dangers of prohibiting it. You are without knowledge apart from anecdotes. Countries that legally regulate cannabis, drug use goes DOWN, age of first use goes UP, and associated crimes decline. Dont support a policy that gifts criminals control over such a 'harmful' plant, because dealers dont ask for ID. I suggest you do some research done by non biased scientists and professors, understand the history of cannabis and prohibition and why it remains illegal in 2012, even though prohibiting it causes MUCH more damage than cannabis ever could!

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

College London, 2012

mauro balbino wrote:
I could compare them to other drugs, traffic accidents or atomic bombs. But the article, arguments & evidences were about cannabis production/use.
Look, Babs, to keep things in perspective we should proceed with Logic and follow its methods.
We just disagree and I wish you the best. Take good care of yourself ;-)

Cannabis is safer than aspirin, it hasn't caused one death by OD, it can be used as medicine, fuel, food, building materials, paper and so on. What can you compare that to?

I suspect the comments may be different if the cannabis growing farm was next door to them!

Maggie Would wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

My final word on the subject: one of my best friends died after he bacame psychotic through heavy cannabis use. I understand the dangers of its use.
Don't lecture me about drugs, I've made it my business to know an awful lot about them. I lived with users for many years, I saw the effects that drugs of many kinds had on them and as a result I don't support their legalisation.

OMG WTF Maggie!!!! I also knew someone once who heard about someone who died of psychosis just by smelling some 'skunk'.

I don't understand these people who say you should listen to science. I'm with Maggie on this...anecdotal evidence all the way for me. That's my final word on this matter.

Harveytux wrote:
I suspect the comments may be different if the cannabis growing farm was next door to them!

Why?

Harveytux wrote:
I suspect the comments may be different if the cannabis growing farm was next door to them!

No they wouldnt. Why would they, do you understand the dangers of prohibition?

pronstar wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese


l wrote:

Maggie Would wrote:

The Doosra wrote:
Like flies to a jam jar!

Ha ha! It happens every time there's a cannabis story, they must lie in wait .....

Maybe if you understood the dangers of prohibition you would have something useful to say.

My final word on the subject: one of my best friends died after he bacame psychotic through heavy cannabis use. I understand the dangers of its use.
Don't lecture me about drugs, I've made it my business to know an awful lot about them. I lived with users for many years, I saw the effects that drugs of many kinds had on them and as a result I don't support their legalisation.

OMG WTF Maggie!!!! I also knew someone once who heard about someone who died of psychosis just by smelling some 'skunk'.

I don't understand these people who say you should listen to science. I'm with Maggie on this...anecdotal evidence all the way for me. That's my final word on this matter.

lol yep, forget the statisitics, science, the evidence and the expert advice. Lets have a policy based on Anecdotes and personal prejudices.

@ Babs, please don't promote CLEAR, their 'leader' has been discredited big time, just in case you didn't know.

http://norml-uk.org/

Unless of course you are said leader using one of your many aliases

pronstar wrote:
@ Babs, please don't promote CLEAR, their 'leader' has been discredited big time, just in case you didn't know.

http://norml-uk.org/

I wouldnt believe everything hate campaigners say.

I assume you are referring to PR as the 'hate-campaigner' mr SSSD, if not then I think you've lost the plot mate, seriously.

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

Omicron wrote:
“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

What do you of cannabis apart from anecdotal evidence? Carry on supporting a policy that keeps criminals rich.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

Omicron wrote:
“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

What do you of cannabis apart from anecdotal evidence? Carry on supporting a policy that keeps criminals rich.

Oh btw i just re read what you said. I DONT USE CANNABIS. And i would rather listen to a professor than a misguided prohibitionists. Cannabis being against the law has nothing to do with harm reduction, scientific evidence, expert advice or to see dealers put out of business long term. Its all about money, greed, vested interest and personal prejudices. That is what our drugs policy is based on. We need to take the control away from criminals. Bringing cannabis into a regulated market will see a decline in criminals selling it and children buying it. When a country regulates cannabis, drug use goes down and age of first use goes up. The amount of criminals selling it declines and taxation ensures a potential 9 billion per year. With out regulation, dealers sell to who ever what ever age, the only ID they need is money. Prevention and therapy is cheaper and more effective than prohibition. Stop pretending people dont use cannabis, the law simply gifts control to criminals. For most of human history cannabis has been completely legal. It’s not a recently discovered plant, nor is it a long standing law. Cannabis has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it’s been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7000 B.C. In fact the reason it became illegal in the first place wasnt anything to do with its effects. It was all about hemp production. Then Anslinger gave birth to reefermadness and from then on the propaganda hasn't stopped. Dont call me stupid when you obviously have NO CLUE.

Omicron wrote:
“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

No, it sums up the intelligence of Professor Terrie Moffitt and his ilk.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

Omicron wrote:
“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

What do you of cannabis apart from anecdotal evidence? Carry on supporting a policy that keeps criminals rich.

Oh btw i just re read what you said. I DONT USE CANNABIS. And i would rather listen to a professor than a misguided prohibitionists. Cannabis being against the law has nothing to do with harm reduction, scientific evidence, expert advice or to see dealers put out of business long term. Its all about money, greed, vested interest and personal prejudices. That is what our drugs policy is based on. We need to take the control away from criminals. Bringing cannabis into a regulated market will see a decline in criminals selling it and children buying it. When a country regulates cannabis, drug use goes down and age of first use goes up. The amount of criminals selling it declines and taxation ensures a potential 9 billion per year. With out regulation, dealers sell to who ever what ever age, the only ID they need is money. Prevention and therapy is cheaper and more effective than prohibition. Stop pretending people dont use cannabis, the law simply gifts control to criminals. For most of human history cannabis has been completely legal. It’s not a recently discovered plant, nor is it a long standing law. Cannabis has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it’s been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7000 B.C. In fact the reason it became illegal in the first place wasnt anything to do with its effects. It was all about hemp production. Then Anslinger gave birth to reefermadness and from then on the propaganda hasn't stopped. Dont call me stupid when you obviously have NO CLUE.

As much as I agree with much of your post, I have to take you to task on a few points. Yes, hemp production was made illegal in the US due to the introduction of vinyl by Dupont. In other words oil based plastics versus plant based and oil won, surprise surprise. Cannabis on the other hand was outlawed because the US wanted to rid itself of migrant Mexican workers during the depression and so sought to demonise them by associating their cannabis use with such demonic behaviour, spawning the term 'marihuana' or 'devil's weed'.

pronstar wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese

l wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese


l wrote:

Omicron wrote:
“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

This mindless statement just about says it all and sums up the intelligence of cannabis users - stupid!!!
So on one's eighteenth birthday it is OK to start using cannabis as it is then "safe". The word "****" comes to mind.

What do you of cannabis apart from anecdotal evidence? Carry on supporting a policy that keeps criminals rich.

Oh btw i just re read what you said. I DONT USE CANNABIS. And i would rather listen to a professor than a misguided prohibitionists. Cannabis being against the law has nothing to do with harm reduction, scientific evidence, expert advice or to see dealers put out of business long term. Its all about money, greed, vested interest and personal prejudices. That is what our drugs policy is based on. We need to take the control away from criminals. Bringing cannabis into a regulated market will see a decline in criminals selling it and children buying it. When a country regulates cannabis, drug use goes down and age of first use goes up. The amount of criminals selling it declines and taxation ensures a potential 9 billion per year. With out regulation, dealers sell to who ever what ever age, the only ID they need is money. Prevention and therapy is cheaper and more effective than prohibition. Stop pretending people dont use cannabis, the law simply gifts control to criminals. For most of human history cannabis has been completely legal. It’s not a recently discovered plant, nor is it a long standing law. Cannabis has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it’s been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7000 B.C. In fact the reason it became illegal in the first place wasnt anything to do with its effects. It was all about hemp production. Then Anslinger gave birth to reefermadness and from then on the propaganda hasn't stopped. Dont call me stupid when you obviously have NO CLUE.

As much as I agree with much of your post, I have to take you to task on a few points. Yes, hemp production was made illegal in the US due to the introduction of vinyl by Dupont. In other words oil based plastics versus plant based and oil won, surprise surprise. Cannabis on the other hand was outlawed because the US wanted to rid itself of migrant Mexican workers during the depression and so sought to demonise them by associating their cannabis use with such demonic behaviour, spawning the term 'marihuana' or 'devil's weed'.

All agreed, but if cannabis wasn't as versatile as it, and only got people high like alcohol, and if angslinger didnt exist, i doubt it would of ever been prohibited. Most people dont understand why it was first prohibited, which is annoying because they think its got something to do with the effects from smoking it. It was more to do with racism and vested interest.

Your post doesn't make any sense whatsoever. In fact I would go as far as to say it's complete gibberish from someone who I would say needs to get that education you speak of.

Politicians don't provide 'solutions'. They wait to see what public opinion is and then change their own opinion to suit. On this particular subject the public are way ahead of the law and the policy makers and don't really care about your 'political solutions', I'm afraid.

So let us assume that cannabis is legalised.
Where would the outlets be for legalised sale?
Who would manufacture it?
Would there be different brands?
What would be the minimum age for use?
What would the amount of duty be?
It would surely be illegal "to grow your own" as this would be seen as tax evasion and would therefore generate a criminal interest for supply of duty free cannabis.
As for medicinal purposes its like saying that people drink whiskey and brandy for medicinal purposes.
At the onset of the NHS there was a school of thought that cigarette smoke was a "mild antiseptic" and that is why smoking was allowed in doctor's waiting rooms and hospital wards.
Get real about cannabis. If it was seen as a benefit then the government would legalise it.
The NHS is already beginning to see the effects on the health service as cannabis is recognised by the medical profession as the prime gateway to harder drugs.
Also judging by some of the comments made by those in support of, and obviously users of, cannabis it is quite easy to spot the effect it has on brains.

No facts, only gibberish from a gullible fool.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

Omicron wrote:
CLEAR is an organisation set up by cannabis users to tell everybody how wonderful cannabis is. It's rather like a bunch of alcholics getting together to tell everyone how wonderful alcohol is. My own opinion is that anyone who uses cannabis is a complete and utter idiot. As are people who still smoke and drink too much.
A friend of my wife, some time back, made a video recording of her husband and some of his friends using cannabis. They thought the cannabis was helping them to have intelligent and meaningful discussion and conversation. The video showed otherwise. When I saw it I could not stop laughing at their antics and attempts at "meaningful" conversation. As regards her husband, he hasn't touched cannabis since he saw the video.

Are you stupid. Iv been on the clear website and it states that cannabis is NOT harmless. It also states how medicinal it is, and compares the harms to legal drugs and always comes out to be the safest. No one is saying its harmless, but compared to aspirin, and most pharmaceuticals, it is harmless relatively.

SO any one who uses cannabis is an idiot? So any one who uses caffeine, alcohol, tobacco and aspirin is an idiot? Those drugs are way more harmful than cannabis apart from caffeine which is said to pose similar harms. You have no idea about the scientific research done on cannabis, the history and the dangers of prohibiting it. You are without knowledge apart from anecdotes. Countries that legally regulate cannabis, drug use goes DOWN, age of first use goes UP, and associated crimes decline. Dont support a policy that gifts criminals control over such a 'harmful' plant, because dealers dont ask for ID. I suggest you do some research done by non biased scientists and professors, understand the history of cannabis and prohibition and why it remains illegal in 2012, even though prohibiting it causes MUCH more damage than cannabis ever could!

“I’m fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains.” - Professor Terrie Moffitt, Institute of Psychiatry at King’s

College London, 2012

I've made a web site (must be true it's in the wild) stating walking casues erectile disfunction - MUST be TRUE!

pronstar wrote:
No facts, only gibberish from a gullible fool.

Surely only gullible fools use cannabis and pronstar has finally list the plot.
Has the cannabis "pickled" his brain I wonder?
I still await answers from the points raised in my previous post.

Oh dear, sorry but you're just not intelligent enough to have a debate with.

SuperSilverSourDiese
l wrote:

Harveytux wrote:
I suspect the comments may be different if the cannabis growing farm was next door to them!

No they wouldnt. Why would they, do you understand the dangers of prohibition?

I didn't even mention prohibition! You've got lots of opinions on this, hopefully the next cannabis grower moves in next door to you and you can put up with the smell and 'visitors' dropping by at all hours to 'visit'. That would be a great impression for your family and friends coming to visit wouldn't it, especially if you were trying to sell your house, cannabis calming the community! You've missed the point of my post, the police are trying to protect the community and neighbours whether it be taking one spliff away or closing down a growing facility it;'s nothing to do with prohibition, the dangers or benefits of cannabis or taking the icicle off the iceberg it's about quality of life for the community.....

Omicron wrote:
CLEAR is an organisation set up by cannabis users to tell everybody how wonderful cannabis is. It's rather like a bunch of alcholics getting together to tell everyone how wonderful alcohol is. My own opinion is that anyone who uses cannabis is a complete and utter idiot. As are people who still smoke and drink too much.
A friend of my wife, some time back, made a video recording of her husband and some of his friends using cannabis. They thought the cannabis was helping them to have intelligent and meaningful discussion and conversation. The video showed otherwise. When I saw it I could not stop laughing at their antics and attempts at "meaningful" conversation. As regards her husband, he hasn't touched cannabis since he saw the video.

well said

pronstar wrote:
Oh dear, sorry but you're just not intelligent enough to have a debate with.

Does that mean that you are unable to answer simple logical questions?
Cannabis got to your brain again has it?

Harveytux wrote:

SuperSilverSourDiese l wrote:

Harveytux wrote: I suspect the comments may be different if the cannabis growing farm was next door to them!

No they wouldnt. Why would they, do you understand the dangers of prohibition?

I didn't even mention prohibition! You've got lots of opinions on this, hopefully the next cannabis grower moves in next door to you and you can put up with the smell and 'visitors' dropping by at all hours to 'visit'. That would be a great impression for your family and friends coming to visit wouldn't it, especially if you were trying to sell your house, cannabis calming the community! You've missed the point of my post, the police are trying to protect the community and neighbours whether it be taking one spliff away or closing down a growing facility it;'s nothing to do with prohibition, the dangers or benefits of cannabis or taking the icicle off the iceberg it's about quality of life for the community.....

I think you'll find that those that support cannabis use the word "prohibition" to liken it being illegal to that of the 1920's in America when most states prohibited the sale of alcohol and that is why it attracts criminal involvement.
The difference is that alcohol was legal and then banned. Cannabis has never been legal and though the word "prohibition" may be technically correct it is, in practice, being used in the wrong context.

Prohibition is the effect of prohibiting something, such as alcohol or cannabis or ecstasy. It doesn't matter what you are prohibiting or what the legal status was before it happens, it's just prohibition.

Cannabis was made illegal the UK in 1928 so presumably was legal before that. It was widely used in medicine, with Queen Victoria being one it's biggest advocates as she used a cannabis tincture for the relief of her premenstrual cramps.

Why don't you look stuff up? You've got internet access haven't you?

Just one question. If Cannabis is not bad for you, or it wouldn't lead you to harder drugs. Why wouldn't the government make it legal? They would get revenue and reduce crime!

The government are looking for as many ways as possible to raise taxes

Why do you believe that Government ever does anything that's good for the people? We are governed for the benefit of big business & finance and therein lies your answer as to why cannabis is prohibited.

Can I just ask what the pro cannabis folk are trying to achieve by beating the commentors over the head with the legalise cannabis stick??

Talk about a dog with a bone lol. Let it go......smoke a reefer and beware the reefer madness lol

I see lots of people are being very selective in quoting Terrie Moffit.
What she actually said was
" I'm fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains."
And that is a very small quote from a much larger article regarding a single trial.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/health-1937245
6