|
|
| Cannabis: The Soft Stumbling Block |
|
Posted by FoM on July 20, 2001 at 20:29:02 PT By Kevin Williamson Source: The Scotsman 
Why is it that when the last three home secretaries have been asked why cannabis users are still criminalised for what they do in the privacy of their own homes, all three of them have given different answers? David Blunkett recently said it was for health reasons, claiming that cannabis does damage to the user. Jack Straw said legalisation would "inevitably" increase the number of users "as sure as night follows day". The last Conservative Home Secretary, Michael Howard, said it was "a gateway to harder drugs". Is it possible that, in desperation, the opponents of changing the drug laws keep moving the goalposts because they have lost the arguments; game, set and match? If damage to health was the reason why something was made illegal then a word in the ear of any doctor would have told these legislators that it’s fried and junk food, too much sugar, cigarettes, and alcohol that are filling up medical surgeries and killing the majority of Scots. Illegal drugs like cannabis don’t even get a look in. Even at the height of the BSE crisis the government didn’t ban supermarkets from selling British beef yet we have seen horrifying pictures on TV of young people dying as a result of legally sold food in this country. So much for the idea of a benign government looking after the nation’s health. Everyone accepts that cigarettes kill over 100,000 people every year in Britain but the tobacco companies are still allowed to advertise and promote their deadly drug anywhere they can get away with it. Banning cigarettes isn’t even considered. This hypocrisy defies any logical analysis. Jack Straw’s argument that legalisation would increase the number of users of cannabis, for instance, doesn’t hold water either. In Holland, where it can be legally bought, cannabis use is significantly lower per head of population than in either Britain or America, the two most enthusiastic champions of drug prohibition. The aggressive, unregulated, pyramid selling structures of the black market have been directly responsible for the rapid growth rates in drug use over the last 30 years. All the policing in the world has hardly made a dent in supply. Thankfully the gateway theory to harder drugs is pretty much discredited now. A recent comprehensive report on tackling drug misuse presented to the Scottish parliament concluded that the gateway drug to heroin addiction was poverty and poor social conditions. Cannabis was never even mentioned. The arguments for legalisation of cannabis have never been stronger. Drug use would be out in the open instead of underground; the gun-toting gangsters would no longer have control of the market and all the wealth, power, violence and corruption that goes with it; tax payers would millions as police, courts and prisons would be freed up from having to deal with 100,000 cannabis offenders every year; taxation has been estimated it could bring in as much as £3 billion a year to the Exchequer; and most importantly, as a more tolerant society we could finally treat drug use as a health and social concern, not a criminal justice one. Criminalising people for what is essentially a victimless crime is both unjustifiable and pointless. Yet decriminalisation on its own would be a dopey half way house leaving control of the market in the hands of the same gangsters and most of the above benefits to society would be lost. The need for legalisation is only a pragmatic recognition that recreational drug use won’t go away. Consequently, the legalisation debate should now be moving on from whether and start focusing on when and how. Note: The case for legalisation of cannabis points out the huge health risks carried by cigarettes and alcohol, not to mention unsafe food. ‘Cigarettes kill over 100,000 in Britain but tobacco firms can still advertise’ - ‘The gateway theory to harder drugs is pretty much discredited’ Kevin Williamson is drugs spokesman for the Scottish Socialist Party. Source: Scotsman (UK) Related Articles: Don't Hold Your Breath on Cannabis Former Minister Attempts To Legalise Cannabis CannabisNews Articles - UK Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #6 posted by schmeff on July 23, 2001 at 11:29:53 PT |
| I think if you have a free market, use will increase for the simple fact that cannabis is a superior intoxicant to what is currently legally available. The way free markets work is that the maketplace (i.e. "consumers") shakes out the good products from the bad. I think that consumers of alcohol use it as an intoxicant because it is legal and available, effective and relatively affordable. The major downfall of alcohol is that it is toxic, and one's body reacts to the toxicity in direct relationship to quantity ingested. In my mind, a superior product to alcohol would be legal and available, effective and relatively affordable, and NON-TOXIC. Sound like any herbal product you know? This allows one to wake-up the next morning after a night of RESPONSIBLE intoxication and not feel like shite. Nor does cannabis propel one towards belligerence and violence. Cannabis consumption would increase, I believe, somewhat to the detriment of alcohol sales. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #5 posted by Doug on July 21, 2001 at 10:55:26 PT |
| On one hand, a lot of baby boomers who no longer use it because they no longer know a dealer (unless they have a child in high school) or who no longer use because it's not "cool" in their circles (e.g. Bill Clinton) would probably start to use it again it they could easily get a supply. On the other hand, a lot of people who use it because it's illegal (the forbidden fruit syndrome) wou;d no longer be tempted to tried something boringly legal. It would be a toss-up. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #4 posted by observer on July 21, 2001 at 09:35:47 PT |
| Is it possible that, in desperation, the opponents of changing the drug laws keep moving the goalposts because they have lost the arguments; game, set and match? What? No ... no, no! Say it isn't true! This outbreak of sanity in the UK is really something to behold. You can bet your bottom dollar that the US government is putting all kinds of pressure on the UK and Canadian governments to squelch and censor this crazy talk of not jailing cannabis takers. I imagine that now is when Echelon would be a great tool ... all those dossiers that have been accumulated on politicians can be selectively leaked to the press. Expect politicans who favour returning freedom to people to come in line for such treatment. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by aocp on July 21, 2001 at 02:03:05 PT |
| Everyone accepts that cigarettes kill over 100,000 people every year in Britain but the tobacco companies are still allowed to advertise and promote their deadly drug anywhere they can get away with it. Banning cigarettes isn’t even considered. This hypocrisy defies any logical analysis. Indeed. Something's fishy. As far as i can tell, the drug [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by bruce42 on July 21, 2001 at 01:38:25 PT |
| I can just see the headlines: "Terribly Safe Drug Hits the Streets!" Marijuana a gateway drug? Please. There is no such thing. Drugs do not cause you to take more drugs [unless of course you're on the patch!]. A lack of truthful information and drug education leads to the use of more drugs... "oh boy! weed isn't bad at all! my DARE instructor was lying! pass the crack pipe, after all it can't be worse than that demon-weed!" Perhaps a bit simplistic and exaggerated, but I hope you get the point. I mean, how does getting hooked on one drug get you insta-hooked on another. Honestly, what a crock. Drugs don't help each other out. I've never heard the bud in the bowl I'm about to smoke tell me to go find a crack dealer. Drugs are just things- they have no self-awareness (I hope). People make the choice to use a drug, the drugs don't do it for them. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #1 posted by grassmike on July 21, 2001 at 00:06:25 PT:
|
| Well if you take a popular illegal substance and make it legal, why wouldn't you expect the use to go up? So what? Did you ever think that alcohol use might go down. MJ is a sensible alternative to alcohol. I used to drink but not anymore. I still remember how awful I felt the next day and said a hundred times I won't do this anymore. Alcohol abuse is more destructive than all other abuse combined(if you factor out the incarcerations, the expense used in bringing them to justice and warehousing them, and the AIDS that many of them get in prison.) Think of the billions in revenue it would raise? Do you know how many zero's are in a billion? Think of the value to the quality of life of 20 million users knowing they aren't being hunted down as criminals. Think of all the gas it will save trying to hunt down a quarter bag. Think of the $40 to $50 that that quarter bag cost times 20 million customers. Think of that money coming above ground instead of going to the mob bosses. Yeah MJ use will increaase and night does follow day. A lot of us think that would make a better world. People that sell Xanex and Valium are sure to disagree as well as the dogmatic religious conservatives. They ought to make this guy get high once week for a year, and then he could at least make some kind of informed statement. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |