Reclassifying Cannabis

otware Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 02:37:40 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

This is a serious issue that needs proper debate, not just pandering to the rabid tabloid press.



It looks to me like Gordon Brown is trying to out-Tory the Tories. What do you think? 

What role does the media play in this? It is without a doubt that this issue has been subject to widespread media debate recently, but the validity is highly questionable as a lot of the information in the press is either false, exaggerated or misrepresented.  

What should be the overall aim of the UK drugs policy? I think there needs to be debate on this issue before any further legislation is proposed. 



tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Reclassifying Cannabis | 14 comments (14 topical)

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#1)

by Mark Wadsworth on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 04:25:11 PM GMT

Just bloody legalise it.


It is the ILLEGALITY of drugs that causes most of the harm (i.e. health risks, turf wars, crime and prostitution to support habits and so on), not anything inherent in the drugs themselves.


See excellent article <a href=http://www.libertarianuk.net/pages//posts/the-danger-of-illegal-in-regard-to-illegal-drugs.51.p hp>here</a>.


Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#2)

by Mark Wadsworth on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 04:26:02 PM GMT

Ooops, try this link


[ Parent ]

It's all for Paul Dacre (#3)

by rwendland on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 05:00:53 PM GMT

Daily Politics opinion today was this is part of a play for Paul Dacre's favours - for the Daily Mail/Middle England vote. Brown has thrown in the Super-casinos & Reclassifying Cannabis bones, Cameron has gone for the support-marriage & dangerous-villains-let-out-of-jail bones. Expect more populist-soft-tory measures.

Sounds plausible. Isn't real-world (big-boy?) politics such a joy. 


Re: It's all for Paul Dacre (#6)

by rwendland on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:06:33 PM GMT

... Talking of the Daily Mail, how about this cut-out-and-play card game they offer to reinforce middle England's value systems:

Daily mail parlour game 


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#4)

by NorthernMonkey on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 06:30:08 PM GMT

I don't agree with legalising cannabis, but I'm not liking all this prudish moralising that Brown's doing at the moment.


The supercasino decision was a big negative for me and it's sad that Brown seems to want to satisfy the social conservatives at the Daily Mail so much.


I hope this doesn't continue for long.


Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#9)

by otware on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 01:23:20 PM GMT

British politics has become overly confused recently. With everyone striving to be in the centre ground, it is the interests of the Daily Mail reading average person that are the most important. The parties seem to be interchangable in terms of policy now that ideology and conviction has gone down the pan. It's just effetively a choice between personalities.


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#5)

by jkitleft on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 06:38:21 PM GMT

This is an odd policy, but I think taking the drugs shouldn't be a crime, but that selling or distributing the drug should be.


Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#7)

by swatantra on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 09:59:31 AM GMT

Crime flourishes because there is a market.
Its demand and supply; its market economics. Dealers are as much to blame as the users, so punish both.
Yes, reclassify it. It should only be prescribed for medical use, to relieve pain.


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#8)

by otware on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:11:44 PM GMT

Do you really think the market will disappear because it's been reclassified as Class B? The number one theory behind any drugs policy, that the givernment just doesn't seem to understand, is that you can never get rid of the demand for drugs.

People will always find a way, so why not decriminalise the individual and let them take their drugs, that they know aren't contaminated, in a safer environment.

 On the other hand, there are drugs that I think should not be legal - heroin, crack/cocaine, crystal meth etc.


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#10)

by jkitleft on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 02:52:32 PM GMT

saying people should be punished for buying the dealers drugs is a valid opinion. the argument seems to be that they are giving money to people who may commit further crimes, if so, they are in part, responsible. but gun shop owners who sold weapons (before 1997) to people who went on to commit crimes, weren't considered, in part, responsible. 


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#11)

by otware on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:12:49 PM GMT

It's certainly a valid option. But if drugs are legalised then the organised crime element is removed.

Good point about the gun shops. You could say the same thing about somebody who serves alcohol to a drunk person who then goes on to harm somebody. 


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#12)

by otware on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:13:34 PM GMT

*valid 'opinion'.


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#13)

by Peter Kenyon on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 03:22:36 PM GMT

Let's unpick the proposition:

"Crime flourishes because there is a market"

The nature of the markets for drugs of any kind varies not just in relation to supply and demand, but the underlying factors shaping both, for example regulation, addictive properties and disposable income.

Would it be more accurate to say, crime flourishes because some drugs are classified as banned substances.

Would crime flourish if there were no banned substances?
 


[ Parent ]

Re: Reclassifying Cannabis (#14)

by otware on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 04:18:37 PM GMT

Indeed. It's also important to distinguish between the different banned substances. People who smoke cannabis generally don't go around mugging old ladies and pawning stolen goods to pay for their supply. That behaviour is more typical of a heroin addict.


[ Parent ]

Reclassifying Cannabis | 14 comments (14 topical)