Adebayor's started so well for Man City
Cannabis - a B or not a B?
Many of you have told me that you smoke cannabis as you go about your daily lives - you have jobs, children, mortgages - you are fully functioning responsible adults and you break the law regularly because you don't believe cannabis is particularly harmful. The debate today is about whether cannabis should be upgraded to a Class B drug again (it was on David Blunkett's watch as Home Secretary the drug was downgraded to a "C").
Does it make any difference to you if the drug is Class B or class C? What about the message it sends out to younger people who might consider trying it? And why do you smoke something that many studies show can be harmful?
I smoked it once at university. It made me fall asleep and apparently I missed a really good night. So I never bothered again.
The Government (and the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú) tells everybody to drink! There are "recommended safe levels" we are all supposed to take of this killer drug. According to the World Health Organisation, alcohol causes 10% of the disease burden in Western countries. Just think about that: one tenth of all the early deaths, one tenth of al the costs to the NHS and the benefits system all comes from a single cause, a drug habit with "Government Recommended" stamped all over it.
Cannabis can cure alcohol addiction. It can also be a highly effective remedy for chronic pain, spasticity and the effects of chemotherapy. Labour and the Tories want to send people to prison for managing incurable illnesses. They will do anything, it seems , to boost the profits of the alcohol dealers, including torture.
At the same time, who knows how many Incapacity Benefits claimants - alcoholics and people with chronic pain numerous among them- could improve their health and thus become fit to work if cannabis were legal? If they are not prepared to let people help themselves to better health, the Government has no right to complain about the levels of Incapacity Benefits claims.
Cannabis should be fully legal. All the harms it is said to cause happen *under prohibition*. For every scare story on the front pages, one has to ask "how did the illegality of cannabis help prevent this tragedy happening?"
Most of our European neighbouring countries are relaxing cannabis prohibition steadily, and they are not seeing any increase in resulting drug harms. Only Britain seems so addicted to alcohol, it simply will not tolerate any alternative.
The Government (and the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú) tells everybody to drink! There are "recommended safe levels" we are all supposed to take of this killer drug. According to the World Health Organisation, alcohol causes 10% of the disease burden in Western countries. Just think about that: one tenth of all the early deaths, one tenth of al the costs to the NHS and the benefits system all comes from a single cause, a drug habit with "Government Recommended" stamped all over it.
Cannabis can cure alcohol addiction. It can also be a highly effective remedy for chronic pain, spasticity and the effects of chemotherapy. Labour and the Tories want to send people to prison for managing incurable illnesses. They will do anything, it seems , to boost the profits of the alcohol dealers, including torture.
At the same time, who knows how many Incapacity Benefits claimants - alcoholics and people with chronic pain numerous among them- could improve their health and thus become fit to work if cannabis were legal? If they are not prepared to let people help themselves to better health, the Government has no right to complain about the levels of Incapacity Benefits claims.
Cannabis should be fully legal. All the harms it is said to cause happen *under prohibition*. For every scare story on the front pages, one has to ask "how did the illegality of cannabis help prevent this tragedy happening?"
Most of our European neighbouring countries are relaxing cannabis prohibition steadily, and they are not seeing any increase in resulting drug harms. Only Britain seems so addicted to alcohol, it simply will not tolerate any alternative.
I was cut off from the show earlier. I would very much like to be connected back to the show. I have a lot more to say on the subject of cannabis.
Kind Regards
Matt
I have never smoked or taken any illegal drugs because it is illegal. What is a shame is the fact that many people do, and the government fails to protect them by allowing gangsters to run these drug supply businesses.
My experience with drugs is taken from my grandmother and son.
My grandmother died months after being robbed for money to fund some guys habit. Perhaps a state controlled drug market would reduce prices and stop the crime ( and sex trade) because drugs would more affordable.
My 16 year old son is interested in marijuana, but I cant look him in the eye and give him advice because I feel politicians spew out social and moral based data rather than honesty.
I want cheap, high quality, government risk warnings, state controlled drugs market. This would reduce crime on grounds af affordability, reduce health risks for users, and provide tax revenue to pick up the casualties of a new drugs environment.
As usual, the debate hinges around anecdotal evidence from the small percentage of people affected by whatever nasty you happen to be discussing and ignoring the millions who smoke dope, drink alcohol, play video games etc who are unaffected.
Should cannabis remain a class C drug? Of course not: it should be legalised.
The arguments for criminalisation are unconvincing at best, relying as they do on 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' strategies. Claiming that cannabis use can lead to psychotic episodes is no more fruitful than saying that playing video games can lead to violence. Some people may have genetic or social tendencies to psychosis or violence but it does not follow that these are caused by cannabis or games, just as a heart attack is not caused by strenuous exercise but by a pre-existing condition. If one knows of the condition then one can avoid the triggers, if not then it's pot luck (pun intended).
If the arguments about cannabis are accepted then it is only logical to criminalise tobacco and alcohol too. Along with anything else that could potentially harm susceptible people. Like exercise, for instance, or peanuts.
I didn't hear the show so can't comment on what was said but i read the blurb on here before looking at the comments and then said to my sister i'll bet within the first sentence some will have mentioned alcohol and guess what i'm not disappointed am i
I despise drugs , i've never taken an illegal drug in my life but i drink so i guess that in the eyes of the criminals who defend drug use that makes me an hypocrite.
Of course i would have a great deal more respect for these criminals if just once they made the argument for their criminal activity without trying to spin about a perfectly legal substance in alcohol.
Whether cannabis should be legal is an argument that maybe needs to be had personally i don't think so.
As regards alcohol well that argument is moot as its one of well if we were framing a law we wouldn't start from here so the comparison to Cannabis is a non starter.
From the level of argument that always ensues whenever this contentious issue comes up then i understand where the stuff gets its nickname dope.
What i would like to see is the reclassification take place back to Class B and for the Police to fully enforce the law on possession if that happens to catch some nice middle class kids without a stain on their character then tough, don't break the law.