The cannabis debate

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
There's been a lot in the papers recently about the modern cannabis strains which are supposedly 25 times stronger than those from twenty years ago (which I'm somewhat sceptical of, as it happens) and the connection between this and current levels mental illness (particularly schizophrenia) in young people and also violent crime. For example, it's claimed in the trial of Tom Palmer that he was smoking it every day by the age of 15.

So what's your views on all this? Personally I think the answer is legalising the production of cannabis under government licence and taxing it according to THC content. The low-grade stuff could be taxed at a level comparable to tobacco, and perhaps even marketed as a less addictive tobacco alternative; the medium-strength stuff could be more expensive while the so-called 'super skunk' would remain illegal. You could increase the penalty for producing and trafficking it, in fact. The reason producers make stuff as strong as possible is precisely because it's illegal - after all, in prohibition-era America people didn't brew beer, did they? They made bathtub gin.
Naturally, a stringent age limit would apply and you'd only be able to buy it from licensed shops.

The police would immediately have huge amounts of resources and manpower freed up, as they'd no longer be compelled to hunt down everyone who has the odd spliff on a Friday night; this would allow them to concentrate their efforts on catching the high-level dealers of more harmful drugs, including very strong cannabis. The demand for this would soon fall due the increased street price (because of the increased police threat to illicit producers) and the availability of decent-quality legal cannabis. Consumers would know what they were getting and wouldn't be at risk of either being ripped off or spun out with weaker/stronger gear than they were expecting. The entire 'gateway drug' argument would fall apart straight away, since you'd no longer have to buy it from a 'drug dealer'. The government would rake in huge amounts of tax. Organised crime activity would fall considerably.

So, once again, what are your views?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
It's kind of frustrating because that's obviously (roughly) the right thing to do but equally obviously it's never going to happen in any of our lifetimes.
Oh well.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Well, yeah. I guess that almost goes without saying.

I was thinking about it because someone in the paper today said the new strains of weed were the cannabis equivalent of crack, which is so popular at the moment because if you're risking prison to get high, you might as well get really fucking high. Hence the bathtub gin analogy - I mean, you can set up a still at home quite easily (and illegally) and make stupidly strong moonshine for next to nothing, but people don't because a) it'd taste revolting, b) it's likely to make you lose your teeth and/or sight, c) you could get caught and d) you can buy spirits in an off-licence (that have none of these undesirable properties, apart from the health effects if you really overdo it).
 

DigitalDjigit

Honky Tonk Woman
Cocaine and opium were legal 100 years ago, speed as recently as the 50's. I am optimistic that we will see legalization of some sort in our lifetimes. I mean it's as ridiculous as outlawing chocolate especially when by this time surely well over half the population have tried it in their lifetimes. Yeah, that's one thing that just always surprises me - the babyboomers are in power now and a good number of them have smoked cannibis, how can they be so hypocritical?
 

zhao

there are no accidents
i think cannibis is more threatening to the status quo (work/consume/die) than alcohol. i think ginsberg once said something to the same effect: that weed opens mental "doors" whereas alcohol doesn't. alcohol actually fits into the routine of modern life very well: work all week, get shitfaced on the weekeend, and do it all over again. and again and again and again. but weed makes it all seem very silly and you get other ideas about how you can better spend your time.

legal or not i will continue to get high as a motherfucker whenever i goddamn feel like it :D :eek:
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
i think cannibis is more threatening to the status quo (work/consume/die) than alcohol. i think ginsberg once said something to the same effect: that weed opens mental "doors" whereas alcohol doesn't.

Weeell, yes and no...if by 'open mental doors' you mean 'make people sit around and go 'woah' a lot', then yeah...don't get me wrong, I think it's great stuff if used sensibly, but I view it primarily as an inebriant, different from alcohol in important respects but useful mainly for relaxing with some mates rather than attaining ineffable cosmic truths. Everything just seems so much more profound when you're stoned (often to a hilarious degree). In terms of allowing you to view the world and life in a genuinely different way that has some chance of staying with you after the immediate effects have worn off I'd say ecstasy and acid/mushrooms are much more likely to do that than weed, although they're both obviously much more full on DRUG experiences.
 

zhao

there are no accidents
also i think capitalism/patriarchy/whatever prefers aggressivity and shuns passivity.
 

zhao

there are no accidents
and sometimes i think REALLY great music is not played on the radio because it's too good, and would take people's minds away from the humdrum assembly line mental state. it's better to hypnotize people with surface distractions.

by the same note, sometimes i think amazing music is not played in clubs because people would not need to drink nearly as much if the music is that powerfully transporting. i personally DEFINITELY buy more drinks if the music sucks.
 

vimothy

yurp
In the Dam no one smokes stupidly strong skunk (well, tourists obviously do) all day long, just like how over here no one drinks vodka and brandy all day long - if you're going to do it all day you drink a session beer or whatever. If weed was legal you'd have a lot more choice and could smoke some nice chilled out hash rather than having to skin up with brain melting hydro weed all the time.

Make it legal please, someone.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
"and sometimes i think REALLY great music is not played on the radio because it's too good, and would take people's minds away from the humdrum assembly line mental state. it's better to hypnotize people with surface distractions."
I used to think something along those lines but now I reckon the truth is much more mundane, most people just don't really like music.
The other day (well a few months ago) I went out with a load of people after work to a crappy bar in central London where they were blaring out the shittest commercial disco-house you've ever heard. There was nowhere to dance and it was too loud to talk but no-one (except me) seemed at all bothered by it. The same evening I went to a night some friends were putting on at the Spitz, they were in the backroom playing loads of acid-folk, turkish jazz etc at a far more sociable volume but people who came in seemed to be totally mystified and I overheard people saying "some arty shit" and other similar things.
I get the depressing feeling that even though no-one was actively enjoying the bar music most people simply do prefer that as some kind of safety blanket rather than hearing something out of the ordinary.
Anyway, who cares if cannabis opens your mind or not, there is a clear case for legalization regardless. If it does so much the better.
 

vimothy

yurp
And I'm sure that there's better music to hypnotise people with than rot like the Killers or whatever's popular - wouldn't the Taj Mahal Travellers or Richie Hawtin or Jack Rose or Halfler Trio shut down your thinking a lot more and get you concentrated on whatever mind-numbing task you're actually doing? Works for me anyway.
 

noel emits

a wonderful wooden reason
Anyone tried Spice Gold? It's a legal (in the UK at least) herbal smoking mixture. I like it. The effects are surprisingly similar to Cannabis but slightly different in a pleasant way. Maybe slightly more 'spacey' and relaxing. And it smells nice.

Here's what's in it for all you ethnobotanists: Baybean, Blue Lotus, Lion's Tail, Lousewort, Indian Warrior, Dwarf Scullcap, Maconha Brava, Pink Lotus, Marshmallow, Red Clover, Rose, Siberian Motherwort, Vanilla and Honey.

http://www.everyonedoesit.co.uk/onl...tra_Strong__An_Eighth_35g.cfm?iProductID=4025

Obviously I'm all up for the legalisation of C. It could be beneficial on so many levels.
 

noel emits

a wonderful wooden reason
You're doing it all wrong

Terrence Mckenna said that most people use Cannabis incorrectly. He said the way to do it is infrequently and in MASSIVE quantities.

Jim Baker (Father Yod) said that it was best to have one hit held for six seconds first thing in the morning.
 

vimothy

yurp
Terrence Mckenna said that most people use Cannabis incorrectly.

I'm not sure that I believe that is it possible to use cannabis incorrectly.

has he ever tried shotties or hot knives, that's what I want to know
 

mms

sometimes
Terrence Mckenna said that most people use Cannabis incorrectly. He said the way to do it is infrequently and in MASSIVE quantities.

Jim Baker (Father Yod) said that it was best to have one hit held for six seconds first thing in the morning.

cannabis is a right old 20th century drug, it hasn't got the same history of legal/illegal as coke or opium. People used to drink in the 18th century rather than smoke it, which was unpredictable and mental making.

who really really enjoys smoking lots of weed?

i did as a kid but i fear it was all part of some kinda macho game playing .
 
Top