• UK cannabis reclassification evidence a load of shit according to Prof. David Nutt
    73 replies, posted
420 420 smoke weed everyday blaze up mofucka God damn it I hate stoners.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;18079466]I can just see a future government announcing one day ... "You know what? You're right; cannabis [b]is[/b] as dangerous as smoking and alcohol. We'll ban those too!"[/QUOTE] It's not about the damage It's about the tax.
Is the reason we follow laws not so that we can do as we please without effecting others? Then why am i not allowed to do whatever the fuck i want to my body? If the government want to fix the problems caused by drugs then they should supply them in a safe and controled manner, not try and tell people what they can and can't do.
[QUOTE=shakey42;18079759]Is the reason we follow laws not so that we can do as we please without effecting others? Then why am i not allowed to do whatever the fuck i want to my body? If the government want to fix the problems caused by drugs then they should supply them in a safe and controled manner, not try and tell people what they can and can't do.[/QUOTE] Drugs are bad for you, they are just protecting you.
[QUOTE=jcallan;18078424]Would not happen in a million years[/QUOTE] Not completely true. I reckon in ten years it'll be impossible to get them in shops. Smoking is old fashioned. It was created when people didn't know the harmful effects, now we know the harmful effects, it needs to go.
[QUOTE=Bengley;18080000]Not completely true. I reckon in ten years it'll be impossible to get them in shops. Smoking is old fashioned. It was created when people didn't know the harmful effects, now we know the harmful effects, it needs to go.[/QUOTE] Smoking has been around since we learnt to burn stuff. I agree it is bad but it also feels kind of good on the exhail.
No-one is in the position to tell someone if they can or can't do something, whether it is harmful or not.. If i want to smoke i will, i don't want or need you to protect me, Fuck off. Do you think that the only people that smoke are the ones that do not know the harmful effects?
[QUOTE=shakey42;18082041]No-one is in the position to tell someone if they can or can't do something, whether it is harmful or not.. If i want to smoke i will, i don't want or need you to protect me, Fuck off. Do you think that the only people that smoke are the ones that do not know the harmful effects?[/QUOTE] The problem is if there is the chance you could develop a mental disorder and it would become other peoples responsibility to look after you, which is unfair. So its not really "You can't tell me what to do".
I was listening to him on Radio 4 this morning. He puts forward a pretty good argument.
[QUOTE=Kingy_who;18075550]government do shit without evidence all the time, seeing as I'm not going to take weed, I don't care.[/QUOTE] Are you serious, "take weed." You're gettin me all giggly.
There is also the whole fact that, you know, Jacqui Smith is fucking retarded.
Just legalize it and tax it already, jesus fucking christ.
[QUOTE=radioactive;18079933]Drugs are bad for you, they are just protecting you.[/QUOTE] Yeah but NO you have no idea what you are talking about, do you? [QUOTE=Conn92;18079551]It's not about the damage It's about the tax.[/QUOTE] True say Therein lies the problem; the government stopped working for the people a long long time ago.
Legalize it everywhere. Tax the shit out of it. It's a win win, political magets are happy, people are baked, and happy.
Please legalize cannabis in england Please legalize cannabis in england Please legalize cannabis in england Please legalize cannabis in england. You know I don't think it would seem as fun if it were legalized. Like if I'm high and my friends are high and we're hungry, we go to the shops and try and act all covert and shit and end up looking hilariously stupid, but if we could just walk into the shop all "yeah we're high and it's legal" and we didn't have to worry about getting caught, then it wouldn't be any fun.
I've said it a thousand times and this will mark the thousand and first... I would rather have my son or daughter in the future smoke marijuana than having cigarettes shoved down their throats because they are legal while having a small amount of cannabis is not.
[QUOTE=decilling;18079289]It is no problem. You can PM me and I will be happy to help you learn more interesting things.[/QUOTE] I don't think I know to know more about the government and it is people thanks.
Latest news - Nutt sack - he got it
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;18089006]Legalize it everywhere. Tax the shit out of it. It's a win win, political magets are happy, people are baked, and happy.[/QUOTE] Hey, let's legalize cocaine too. I hear there's a booming market in that.
[QUOTE=Sams Brume;18099249]Hey, let's legalize cocaine too. I hear there's a booming market in that.[/QUOTE] Definitely not the same thing...
[QUOTE=wheesnah123;18099596]Definitely not the same thing...[/QUOTE] Why not? It's a win win! The political fatcats get to fill their wallets, and everyone else is high as shit.
[QUOTE=Sams Brume;18099882]Why not? It's a win win! The political fatcats get to fill their wallets, and everyone else is high as shit.[/QUOTE] I think that guy was also counting on the fact that people aren't going to get addicted to and die from weed
[QUOTE=Conscript;18099934]I think that guy was also counting on the fact that people aren't going to get addicted to and die from weed[/QUOTE] So? Everyone's happy!
[QUOTE=Sams Brume;18100079]So? Everyone's happy![/QUOTE] You're ignant bro.
[quote]He said skunk has been in wide usage for about 10 years but, he claims, there has been no upswing in schizophrenia.[/quote] Ho!
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;18089006]Legalize it everywhere. Tax the shit out of it. It's a win win, political magets are happy, people are baked, and happy.[/QUOTE] Baked and poor. But yes, happy.
This guy just got sacked: [quote=BBC News]The UK's chief drugs adviser has been sacked by Home Secretary Alan Johnson, after criticising government policies. Professor David Nutt, head of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, criticised the decision to reclassify cannabis to Class B from C. He accused ministers of devaluing and distorting evidence and said drugs classification was being politicised. The home secretary said he had "lost confidence" in his advice and asked him to step down. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is the UK's official drugs advisory body. Following his sacking, Prof Nutt told the BBC he stood by his claim that cannabis should not be a Class B drug, based on its effects. He described his sacking as a "serious challenge to the value of science in relation to the government". And he denied that he had been trying to undermine the government's policies on drugs. "I am disappointed because, to be honest, all I was trying to do was help. I wasn't challenging the government," said the former adviser. "We can help them. We can give them very good advice, and it would be much more simpler if they took that advice rather than getting tangled up in other sorts of messages which frankly really do confuse the public." Prof Nutt said he was not prepared to "mislead" the public about the effects of drugs in order to convey a moral "message" on the government's behalf. Earlier this week Prof Nutt used a lecture at King's College, London, to attack what he called the "artificial" separation of alcohol and tobacco from illegal drugs. The professor said smoking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness. Phil Willis MP, chairman of the science and technology select committee, said he would write to the home secretary to ask for clarification as to why Prof David Nutt had been sacked "at a time when independent scientific advice to government is essential". "It is disturbing if an independent scientist should be removed for reporting sound scientific advice," he said. Public concern over the links between high-strength cannabis, known as skunk, and mental illness led the government to reclassify cannabis to Class B last year. In the past, Prof Nutt has also claimed that taking ecstasy is no more dangerous than riding a horse. In a letter, the home secretary wrote: "I cannot have public confusion between scientific advice and policy and have therefore lost confidence in your ability to advise me as chair of the ACMD. "I would therefore ask you to step down from the Council with immediate effect." In his reply, Prof Nutt said he was "disappointed" by the sentiments expressed by Mr Johnson. He added: "Whilst I accept that there is a distinction between scientific advice and government policy there is clearly a degree of overlap. "If scientists are not allowed to engage in the debate at this interface then you devalue their contribution to policy making and undermine a major source of carefully considered and evidence-based advice." 'Disgraceful' decision Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said the sacking had been "an inevitable decision" after Prof Nutt's "latest ill-judged contribution to the debate". But Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the decision to sack the adviser had been "disgraceful". "What is the point of having independent scientific advice if as soon as you get some advice that you don't like, you sack the person who has given it to you?" he said. Mr Huhne said if the government did not want to take expert scientific advice, it might as well have "a committee of tabloid newspaper editors to advise on drugs policy". Similarly, Claudia Rubin from Release - a national centre of expertise on drugs and drugs law - said the expert should not have been penalised. Cannabis reclassification "It's a real shame and a real indictment of the government's refusal to take any proper advice on this subject," she said. And Prof Colin Blakemore, professor of neuroscience at Oxford University and former chief executive of the Medical Research Council, said the government could not expect experts who serve on its independent committees not to voice their concern if the advice they give is rejected. "I worry that the dismissal of Prof Nutt will discourage academic and clinical experts from offering their knowledge and time to help the government in the future," he said. Possession of Class B drugs carries a maximum sentence of five years in jail while possession of Class C drugs carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment. In 2004, then Home Secretary David Blunkett had approved the reclassification of cannabis from Class B - which it had been since 1971 - to Class C. But in 2008, Jacqui Smith announced that she would reverse the 2004 decision and put cannabis back into category B. The decision was taken despite official advisers recommending against the change. Ministers said they wanted to make the move as a precautionary measure. [/quote] Source: [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8334774.stm[/url]
[QUOTE=Cyrex;18075558]Guess he thought that professor was a NUTTcase :v:[/QUOTE] I think most people thought of a joke like that when they saw his name.
[QUOTE=Sams Brume;18099249]Hey, let's legalize cocaine too. I hear there's a booming market in that.[/QUOTE] Great idea! With all the money earned by taxes we can offer free rehab to anyone who wants to kick their addiction.
[QUOTE=Zeemlapje;18105465]Great idea! With all the money earned by taxes we can offer free rehab to anyone who wants to kick their addiction.[/QUOTE] We'll be swimming in happiness and money!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.