|
|
| Lilley Calls For Soft Drug Legalisation |
|
Posted by FoM on July 06, 2001 at 07:20:33 PT By Anne Perkins and Rebecca Allison Source: Guardian Unlimited 
Cannabis should be legalised and available from government approved off-licences, Peter Lilley, the former deputy Tory leader says today. His call for the decriminalisation of soft drugs comes in a pamphlet published by the centre-right Social Market Foundation, where he argues that outlawing cannabis is "unenforceable and indefensible" in a country where alcohol and nicotine are legal. Mr Lilley, whose attempts to "move on from Thatcherism" got him the sack three years ago, urges the party to reform drug laws in order to effectively change its image. In his pamphlet, followed up with an interview in today's Daily Telegraph, he says that one of the biggest handicaps his party faced during the election was the perception that its policies were negative and punitive on crime and asylum seekers, as well as on drugs. "Nothing could more vividly dramatise reaffirmation of our belief in freedom and personal responsibilty than to move clearly in favour of liberalising the law on cannabis," he writes. He proposes licences for sale of cannabis issued through magistrates' courts, with a ban on under-18 sales and smoking in public places. He believes the drug should be taxed, and also that - like home brewing - growing it for personal consumption should be allowed. "I have tried deploying the arguments for criminalising cannabis in discussions with sixth formers, students and, come to that, their parents, in my constituency. "Whether I convinced any of them I don't know. But I invariably failed to convince myself. The arguments for prohibition crumble on close analysis," he writes. Describing the claimed health risks of moderate in dulgence in cannabis as bogus or exaggerated, Mr Lilley also dismisses the argument that its use is a gateway to harder drugs. "Soft drug users are forced into the arms of hard drug pushers precisely because both cannabis and hard drugs are available through the same channels," he argues. "Short of legalising the trade in cannabis entirely, the only way to stop driving soft drug users into the arms of the criminals who push hard drugs is to license some legal outlets to retail cannabis." It is less than a year since Ann Widdecombe, shadow home secretary, called for a zero tolerance policy on drugs. Although her ideas were ridiculed even by shadow ministers, several of who acknowledged they had experimented with drugs, officially, the party remains extremely cautious about change - as does the government. All five Tory leadership candidates last night on the BBC's Question Time expressed opposition to cannabis legalisation, while accepting it was easily available everywhere. Michael Portillo, whose bid is supported by Mr Lilley, did however agree that the party should review its policy. Downing Street today emphasised that the government's position on cannabis - that it should not be legalised - remains unchanged. "Cannabis is dangerous, it does cause medical problems, cancer, hallucinations - therefore the position has not changed," the prime minister's official spokesman said. Source: Guardian Unlimited, The (UK) Related Articles: Special Report: Drugs in Britain Mowlam Says Legalisation of Cannabis Could Help Mowlam Calls for Cannabis To Be Legalised CannabisNews Articles - UK Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #22 posted by Rambler on July 07, 2001 at 08:42:44 PT |
| "Or the stuff they had back then was something few people encounter today. And probably adulterated, to boot." .In those days,,hash was commonly combined with opium,in what are known as "Temple Balls",at least that's the way it was explained to me, when I was growing up, in France,in the 1800s', or was it 1971?..... [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #21 posted by kaptinemo on July 07, 2001 at 07:24:55 PT:
|
| "in 1972, ALOT of heavily opiated nepalese hash hit california...everybody tried it and bought all they could get...after a few days of THAT, they were exhausted and sold what was left...it was by far the strongest stuff i ever tried...2 hits was tooo much...it induced 4 hours of inactivity (zombielike) followed by no desire to do more... When I first started my research into cannabis, I read the 'classics', first. Baudelaire, le Club du Haschischins, the whole nine yards. Then I read about contemporary accounts of cannabis experiences...and couldn't figure out what happened to all the wild trips those wordy Frenchmen were talking about. Either they were such ingenues that the slightest THC molecule got them totally whacked, or they were engaging in a game of one-upmanship in literary extravagence. Or the stuff they had back then was something few people encounter today. And probably adulterated, to boot. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #20 posted by lookinside on July 06, 2001 at 22:18:00 PT:
|
| visual hallucinations on cannabis was in 1971...i attribute both ocurrances to great pot and alot of acid during the previous year...these were both full blown "flashbacks" that lasted for several hours each...the first freaked me out...the second i enjoyed tremendously... i've had ALOT of "physical" hallucinations(from in 1972, ALOT of heavily opiated nepalese hash hit [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by dddd on July 06, 2001 at 19:00:18 PT |
| ....I would consider myself quite well experienced in the world of hallucinagenics,and I dont think Marijuana makes the grade. If you take a big hit and hold it for too long,you may start seeing things,but that would be from oxygen deprivation.....And of course there has been pot that is fortified with other things that could be hallucinagenic....I have to make an exception for hash however.I have had hash that was somewhat hallucinagenic,,but nothing like acid,mushrooms,mescaline,,etc,,,,dddd [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #7 posted by Dan B on July 06, 2001 at 14:35:08 PT:
|
| It is best to simply ignore him. Whether he goes away or not, I think we can all find satisfaction in leaving his pathetic posts unanswered. Thanks for the advice. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on July 06, 2001 at 13:17:08 PT:
|
| I was trying to enjoy my late, work-delayed lunch when I read that. Eeeeooooo! Nasty! As to the biz of 'hallucinogenic' qualities of cannabis, I have a theory. It is reasonable to assume that, given the prevalence of both opium and cannabis in the 19th Century, and that many of the drugs experimented with by those early Western writers came from the Middle East, where these drugs had been known for thousands of years. It's quite possible that many of the substances that were written about may actually have been mixes of the two. It certainly was a common practice adulterate cannabis products with opiates, in varying gradations, to achieve desired effects. The most famous of which was denoted by the Hindu word postibangh literally translating as "opiated bangh". Then, as now, the market was left without any regulation as to purity, quality, etc. The 'manufacturers' put in the mix whatever they damn' well pleased. And even stranger alkaloids might have been present: scopalamine, derived from Jimson weed, for example. The Datura plant grows over there as it does here, and has been used in recent times to render unsuspecting foreign travellers in India unconscious so that their goods might be stolen. So, when I hrear some anti shriek hysterically about hallucinogenic cannabis, I have to wonder: just which books, if any, ahve they been reading? In short, opium/cannabis hybrids. Which would account for some but not all of the 'visions' experienced by the likes of Ludlow, DeQuincey, Dumas, etc. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by Kevin Hebert on July 06, 2001 at 11:07:17 PT:
|
| As far as hallucinations go, I have gotten slight visual distortion a couple times, and aural distortions frequently, but compared to actual psychedelics, marijuana is not really a hallucination. Of course, it also doesn't cause cancer, but one step at a time, yes? As for Neil, the best thing you could possibly do is ignore him. He's just trolling for flames. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by Doug on July 06, 2001 at 09:53:51 PT |
| LSD was widely considered an hallucinogen (a term which is no longer polictically correct), even though it did not produce an hallucination. I've never experienced any, nor talked to anyone who did, even with very large doses. Part of the problem is what is an hallucination. My dictionary tell me that in an hallucination there needs to be a "compelling" sense of reality. The only common drug I know that can cause hallucinations is our old friend alcohol (think pink elephants) especially in withdrawal, where the DT's can make you think you're crawling with insects. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #3 posted by Dan B on July 06, 2001 at 08:22:00 PT:
|
| Yummmm...toenail fungus tea! Okay . . . this is the first I have heard of cannabis causing hallucinations, but you have to admit that what you had there was pretty concentrated stuff. Most cannabis smokers never get the chance to smoke such primo herb, and likewise most don't experience hallucinations. Still, I find it intriguing that it gave you hallucinations I can attest that blonde hash from Amsterdam doesn't cause hallucinations, but I wouldn't recommend mixing it with alcohol and caffeine (specifically Crown Royal and coke), either. Doing so freaked me out because I could not make my body do what my brain wanted it to do. I like being high, but I don't like being completely out of control. Did the kif leave you helpless like that, or was it otherwise a very pleasant high? Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by greenfox on July 06, 2001 at 08:07:23 PT |
| I'm not one to argue, and for the most part, I think you are absolutely right. However, like many things in life, I think there are exceptions to the norm. In this case, I offer you kif. It was the Grey Area coffieshop, and I was smoking kif (pure crystals). It was called "Grey Mist". I have to offer this: kif will make you hallucinate. :) sly in green, foxy in kind [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #1 posted by Dan B on July 06, 2001 at 07:44:38 PT:
|
| I sure do wish I could find some of this hallucination-inducing weed everyone keeps talking about. Just kidding, of course (as I have pointed out, I haven't had any weed for many months now, in part because I have pledged to remain cannabis-free until it is legal--something I may forego at some point, but for mow I will keep my pledge), but my point is real. Cannabis does not cause, not has it ever caused, hallucinations. This is a hoax perpetrated by the continued classification of marijuana as a "hallucinogen." If cannabis is a hallucinogen, toenail fungus makes great tea. On another note, since the thread continues to grow (currently at #106), I thought I'd post a link to the ever-popular "Neil" sequence: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread10203.shtml By the way, you can tell it was me who posted this because my name is red. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |