|
|
| Medical Advisers Back Cannabis Reform |
|
Posted by FoM on March 14, 2002 at 09:35:39 PT Cannabis is smoked by millions in the UK Source: BBC News 
Cannabis should be downgraded to a Class C drug, a government-commissioned report has recommended. If ministers accept the advice users could be free to smoke it in public without fear of arrest. Medical experts at the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) said the current classification of cannabis alongside substances like amphetamines was "disproportionate" to its harmfulness. A decision on the recommendations will be made after a Home Affairs select committee report on drugs strategy and a review of a pilot project in Lambeth, south London. Both are due by Easter. The prime minister's official spokesman said that while Home Secretary David Blunkett had said he was "minded" to re-classify cannabis "there are no plans for decriminalisation or legalisation". Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said downgrading or decriminalising cannabis would be an ill-thought out solution to a complex problem. During a visit to Langdon College in Salford he said: "Anybody who knows about the difficulties in communities, about young people who are trying drugs and moving on to harder drugs, knows it is far more complex than that." 'Few health risks' ACMD chairman Professor Sir Michael Rawlins said his report was not saying cannabis was harmless. "Cannabis is associated with some risks of health but the council concludes that these are less than the risks posed by other Class B drugs such as amphetamine," he said. The report found the use of cannabis, which has risen sharply over the past 20 years, does not cause any major health problems and rarely causes serious illness in previously healthy people. However, even occasional use posed significant dangers for people with mental health problems including schizophrenia and those with poor circulation or heart conditions. But both groups were still at greater risk from amphetamines. The report said it was impossible to say if cannabis users became addicted or whether they were likely to progress to harder drugs. 'Refreshing' The findings were welcomed by Roger Howard, chief executive of the charity DrugScope. He said: "It is refreshing to have a Home Secretary who is at last willing to open up the debate on drugs and consider moving towards a more logical and pragmatic drugs policy." Mr Howard rejected claims it would lead to an increase in drug use and said he hoped the report would help end prosecution of people found with small amounts of cannabis. But Paul Betts, father of 18-year-old ecstasy victim Leah Betts, said the government had reneged on its promises to be hard on drugs. He said: "This is the start of the slippery slope. They are scared to say it's dangerous." The publication of the report follows last weekend's vote by the Liberal Democrats to support the legalisation of cannabis. Delegates also voted to end imprisonment for the possession of any illegal drug - including heroin and cocaine - and backed the downgrading of ecstasy from a Class A to a Class B drug. Drugs monitor David Blunkett commissioned the ACMD study last October. The ACMD monitors the state of drugs use and misuse in the UK and was set up under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act. Drugs are classified as Class A, B or C according to harm they may cause. Cannabis is a Class B drug, the same category as other substances including amphetamines and growth hormones. Recent studies suggest that cannabis use has risen sharply since the early seventies, especially among those in the 20 to 24 age group. It is refreshing to have a Home Secretary who is at last willing to open up the debate on drugs -- Drugscope Source: BBC News (UK Web) Related Articles: Are We Tolerating The Wrong Drugs? UN Challenges Blunkett Cannabis Plan A History of Debating Marijuana Legalization Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
|
Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on March 14, 2002 at 10:45:57 PT:
|
| "The findings were welcomed by Roger Howard, chief executive of the charity DrugScope. He said: "It is refreshing to have a Home Secretary who is at last willing to open up the debate on drugs and consider moving towards a more logical and pragmatic drugs policy."
Mr Howard rejected claims it would lead to an increase in drug use and said he hoped the report would help end prosecution of people found with small amounts of cannabis.
But Paul Betts, father of 18-year-old ecstasy victim Leah Betts, said the government had reneged on its promises to be hard on drugs. He said: "This is the start of the slippery slope. They are scared to say it's dangerous." Every year, in the United States, over 100,000 people die...from illnesses caused by alcohol. How many of them could have pled ignorance of it's health effects? Not too many - simply because it's effects are largely common knowledge. Common knowledge often courtesy of education received in school. Or children are sat down and told the straight skinny...by their parents. as mine did with me. As apparently, Mr. Betts failed to do with his daughter. People still drink alcoholic beverages. Knowing the risk of illness and addiction...they still...drink. I won't go into why; too many reasons, some couched in biochemistry, some in culture, but almost all of them overshadowed by the fact that the imbibers wanted to get 'high'. It's that simple. I've heard countless euphemisms by alcohol drinkers - who don't like to be called drug users, though that's exactly what they are - as to why they say they drink. To 'relax' (get high), to 'unwind' (get high), to be 'sociable' (everybody in their group gets high together), but they never admit that they drink to get high. Only 'druggies' get high, not them, oh no! They're only 'sociable' drinkers. No doubt Mr. Betts has hoisted a few brewskies...in his daughter's presence. Did he inform her that alcohol was a dangerous drug? Doubtful. People like him don't use 'drugs', 'only' alcohol. Did he educate himself enough to speak knowledgeably about illicit drugs to his daughter? Evidence of her death leads me to think he didn't. People like Mr. Betts shouldn't castigate his government when it sees the light and reverses policies which aid and abet the deaths of people like his daughter. It was, in the end, drug prohibition that was responsible for his daughter's death...as well as his complacency in supporting that prohibition.
[ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |