• UK parliament will hold a debate on cannabis legalisation on 12 October in response to e-petition
    86 replies, posted
[QUOTE=smurfy;48640136]Apparently the debate will be livestreamed on [url=http://parliamentlive.tv/]parliamentlive.tv[/url], a website that I didn't even know existed[/QUOTE] Found the debate topics for tomorrow interesting. Labour readings include assisted dying and representing young people, Conservative ones include traffic wardens and making wind power companies pay for 'public nuisance'.
[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;48654267]First off, finding a rifle or shotgun in modern England seems like it'll be an adventure in of its self. Then secondly people don't need to die or even be threatened with violence by a firearm just because they hate porn and want to see if you're looking at it online.[/QUOTE] It's really not though. Just pop to a local farm (of which you are probably near a dozen at any given time) and you'll probably be able to grab a shotgun with ease. Guns aren't totally impossible to get a hold of here and the myth that they are is fucking silly.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;48655176]It's really not though. Just pop to a local farm (of which you are probably near a dozen at any given time) and you'll probably be able to grab a shotgun with ease. Guns aren't totally impossible to get a hold of here and the myth that they are is fucking silly.[/QUOTE] They are however controlled and licensed, after all what if Geoffrey supposed to hand me when those pesky brats from the coal miners town start picking at my mulberry bush? Well... controlled to a degree, I would not be surprised if a lot of the "hunting weapons" you find in more rural parts of the country are "above board" shall we say.
Why are so many Britons against Cannabis legalization?
[QUOTE=isreal?;48656701]Why are so many Britons against Cannabis legalization?[/QUOTE] Kind of a generalization, the UK does have an issue with the vocal minority where he who writes the most outraged letter to the daily mail gets his opinion heard the most. Older aged stuffy people who think that Britain should be prim and proper at all times, sit upright, keep you elbows off the table and go to church every Sunday. Nothing more offensive that Mary Berry making a "soggy bottom" joke on the Great British Bake Off, anything more would be outrageous an DREADFUL! Some people DO want to drag us back to pre-Victorian times where you had you social class and jolly well stayed there. I personally do not see why there is a big issue in either direction to the point where I have asked either side to come an explain it for me. Why is there such a push to make it legal/illegal?
There's such a push currently because a century of lies about the dangers of marihuana have been revealed to be false. There's such a push, because the average joe blow who smokes some weed faces jail time and life ending consequences for something that society LOVES. Getting drunk is the same as getting high in the sense that both are forms of imparment. Society loves drinking but abhors weed on a pointless and arbitrary distinction. It's being pushed so hard because people know that alcohol is wildly more dangerous and that legalization is a required step to get such an uncontrollable substance in hand. Historically, we know it needs to be legalized, prohibition failed for alcohol and has failed here as wel.
If all drugs were legal, we could use the billions of dollars already being spent on them for good instead of violence
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;48654138]I don't get why people think the government owns a country, they work FOR the people by representing their opinion. If they go against the will of the public they need to get booted out of power, simple as that. It doesn't matter if the government thinks a substance is bad for the public, if the citizens think it should be legalized they have no choice since they represent them. Goddam whos dumb idea was it that the government knows what should be legal or not like they know better. There needs to be a coup in britain.[/QUOTE] I'm not a law academic or a political scientist, but a friend of mine wrote something that expressed exactly what I felt about the situation: [quote]One extreme sees parliamentary processes as a ‘transmission belt’ — mere machinery by which the people get their will done, such that MPs should be chosen according to the [I]content[/I] of their will. Another extreme sees parliament as akin to a fiduciary for an infant, which decides what the people’s will should be on the premise that the people are not in a position to decide for themselves, such that MPs should be chosen according to their [I]wisdom[/I] and [I]knowledge[/I]. Between these extremes are many possible models.[/quote] Personally, I lean more towards the second interpretation of what a government should be, although that is contingent on the fact that those elected are actually more capable than the general public. The problem is the general public are the ones voting for them and they often don't make informed choices, so we end up with idiots in Parliament (or Congress or the Senate). [editline]11th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=cody8295;48657303]If all drugs were legal, we could use the billions of dollars already being spent on them for good instead of violence[/QUOTE] No, if all drugs were legal we'd be losing billions from lost work hours due to the negative health effects of certain drugs like heroin or cocaine.
Here's a poll, Britain's views are actually pretty different from the US apparently [t]http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2015-03-19/cannabisint3.PNG[/t]
Well, considering that parts of the US now have legal cannabis and as far as I'm aware they've not turned into fucking Mad Max, I'm not surprised that Americans are starting to think that maybe it's not Hitler: The Plant Edition.
[QUOTE=Lium;48641755]Your're saying that bad things are legal, so more bad things should be legal as a result. Okay then.[/QUOTE] You can't just say it's bad, as with most drugs there are good and bad things about them, and recreational value is definitely a good thing.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;48659064]You can't just say it's bad, as with most drugs there are good and bad things about them, and recreational value is definitely a good thing.[/QUOTE] But there's nothing wrong with Cannabis use in adults. It improves your quality of life. There is literally zero reason to be opposed.
[QUOTE=isreal?;48659512]But there's nothing wrong with Cannabis use in adults. [B]It improves your quality of life[/B]. There is literally zero reason to be opposed.[/QUOTE] Well that's kinda debatable, if it's anything like alcohol and tobacco then it can quite easily make it worse, as a bystander to this topic I have seen a fair few people blindly decree cannabis as simply "Good!" (roughly as many who decree it literally hitlerbacco) thing is, I've not actually seen ANY reports or information or documents that suggest either way.
[QUOTE=isreal?;48659512]But there's nothing wrong with Cannabis use in adults. It improves your quality of life. There is literally zero reason to be opposed.[/QUOTE] I mean I agree that there is no reason to oppose it, and there are no clear health risks associated with it, my point was mostly that when people say alcohol and tobacco is bad, they're ignoring the recreational value. [editline]11th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=thisguy123;48659886]Well that's kinda debatable, if it's anything like alcohol and tobacco then it can quite easily make it worse, as a bystander to this topic I have seen a fair few people blindly decree cannabis as simply "Good!" (roughly as many who decree it literally hitlerbacco) thing is, I've not actually seen ANY reports or information or documents that suggest either way.[/QUOTE] It isn't anything like alcohol and tobacco though :v:
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48657332] No, if all drugs were legal we'd be losing billions from lost work hours due to the negative health effects of certain drugs like heroin or cocaine.[/QUOTE] What makes you think people would stop going to work and become addicted to heroin just because the government says they're free to do so?
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48657332]No, if all drugs were legal we'd be losing billions from lost work hours due to the negative health effects of certain drugs like heroin or cocaine.[/QUOTE] You assume that a bunch of people would start using heroin and cocaine because it is legal, and prioritize it over work and life?
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;48660134] It isn't anything like alcohol and tobacco though :v:[/QUOTE] It's still a comparison a lot of people draw and the only point of reference I have, regardless of how different it may be, which nobody has explained to me yet.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48660167]What makes you think people would stop going to work and become addicted to heroin just because the government says they're free to do so?[/QUOTE] There'd be a loss of work hours due to people becoming unwell from abusing drugs, the increased expenditures on hospital facilities, more staff, driving under the influence, accidents, etc.
[QUOTE=thisguy123;48660241]It's still a comparison a lot of people draw and the only point of reference I have, regardless of how different it may be, which nobody has explained to me yet.[/QUOTE] Tobacco, you smoke maybe get a stimulating nicotine kick for a minute but most people do it to ease their cravings and because they enjoy the activity of smoking. Alcohol, you drink it and as you get more and more drunk your reflexes slow down, you are more likely to do something you wouldn't normally do because it kills anxiety and makes it harder to imagine the consequences and your co-ordination gets worse. Both of these are physically addictive, and alcohol can kill you if you drink enough. Weed, you smoke and get high for a couple of hours, during which you feel relaxed, maybe find things funnier and weirder and it may be harder to follow a single line of thought, but you would have to smoke (or rather eat) a lot of cannabis before it would seriously affect your decision-making. It's also not physically addictive. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken or have forgotten to mention something, but maybe that gives you some idea.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48660316]There'd be a loss of work hours due to people becoming unwell from abusing drugs, the increased expenditures on hospital facilities, more staff, driving under the influence, accidents, etc.[/QUOTE] So youre of the opinion that most people choose not to abuse drugs because the government says it's bad? Lol
[QUOTE=cody8295;48660167]What makes you think people would stop going to work and become addicted to heroin just because the government says they're free to do so?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=MrJazzy;48660200]You assume that a bunch of people would start using heroin and cocaine because it is legal, and prioritize it over work and life?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=cody8295;48661144]So youre of the opinion that most people choose not to abuse drugs because the government says it's bad? Lol[/QUOTE] Legalisation implies that such drugs will be far more readily available, which, believe it or not, will result in more people using and abusing those drugs.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48660167]What makes you think people would stop going to work and become addicted to heroin just because the government says they're free to do so?[/QUOTE] Probably because there are already huge amounts of people who do it with alcohol. Before you say Cannabis isn't addictive it can definitely lead to some people becoming psychologically dependent on it the same way they might with alcohol.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48661181]Legalisation implies that such drugs will be far more readily available, which, believe it or not, will result in more people using and abusing those drugs.[/QUOTE] The drugs are already available to anbody of any age. The idea of legalization is to make the drugs safer and lower the availability to children. Drug dealers dont check id [editline]11th September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ishwoo;48661195]Probably because there are already huge amounts of people who do it with alcohol. Before you say Cannabis isn't addictive it can definitely lead to some people becoming psychologically dependent on it the same way they might with alcohol.[/QUOTE] And alcohol prohibition only made that problem worse. We need drug education, not drug incarceration
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48661181]Legalisation implies that such drugs will be far more readily available, which, believe it or not, will result in more people using and abusing those drugs.[/QUOTE] It will also make it much safer to use those drugs and people who have addiction will not have to be scared of going to jail, therefor more likely to seek help.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48661204]The drugs are already available to anbody of any age. The idea of legalization is to make the drugs safer and lower the availability to children. Drug dealers dont check id [editline]11th September 2015[/editline] And alcohol prohibition only made that problem worse. We need drug education, not drug incarceration[/QUOTE] Availability is one thing, whether or not people are willing to go out to source for them is something else. I think penalties against drug use do deter people from trying to use them. My main concern with having drugs more freely available is the effect it will have on the prevalence of drug addiction. Drug addiction of any kind is harmful to society due to its negative social and economic impacts, not just on the users but also those around them. This arises out of the previously discussed lost work hours, as well as increased strain on the healthcare system due to treating the various illnesses that drug abusers have, and various other problems that we are already seeing with alcohol and tobacco addiction. You'd probably agree with me that if more people use drugs in general, then more people will also be addicted. Education is important, but I'm not sure how much of an effect that will have on addiction rates. [QUOTE=MrJazzy;48661219]It will also make it much safer to use those drugs and people who have addiction will not have to be scared of going to jail, therefor more likely to seek help.[/QUOTE] This I agree with, but it still doesn't address my concerns about the possibility that more people will get addicted as a result of legalisation.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48661451]Availability is one thing, whether or not people are willing to go out to source for them is something else. I think penalties against drug use do deter people from trying to use them. My main concern with having drugs more freely available is the effect it will have on the prevalence of drug addiction. Drug addiction of any kind is harmful to society due to its negative social and economic impacts, not just on the users but also those around them. This arises out of the previously discussed lost work hours, as well as increased strain on the healthcare system due to treating the various illnesses that drug abusers have, and various other problems that we are already seeing with alcohol and tobacco addiction. You'd probably agree with me that if more people use drugs in general, then more people will also be addicted. Education is important, but I'm not sure how much of an effect that will have on addiction rates. This I agree with, but it still doesn't address my concerns about the possibility that more people will get addicted as a result of legalisation.[/QUOTE] I dont think legalizing is going to cause tons of more people to use drugs. And those who do decide to start might be responsible. Personal freedom trumps security imo
[QUOTE=cody8295;48661486]I dont think legalizing is going to cause tons of more people to use drugs. And those who do decide to start might be responsible. Personal freedom trumps security imo[/QUOTE] I won't argue with you on the first point because there really isn't any way to say for sure. I could point at historical examples (particularly in 19th century China, where two wars were waged and a dynasty collapsed because of opium addiction) but today's world is very different so it's probably a poor comparison. However, I disagree with your second point. Personal liberties end when they start to infringe on the liberty of others. Drug use leading to addiction arguably infringes on the lives of members of the society in general through the mechanisms I have previously submitted.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48661602]I won't argue with you on the first point because there really isn't any way to say for sure. I could point at historical examples (particularly in 19th century China, where two wars were waged and a dynasty collapsed because of opium addiction) but today's world is very different so it's probably a poor comparison. However, I disagree with your second point. Personal liberties end when they start to infringe on the liberty of others. Drug use leading to addiction arguably infringes on the lives of members of the society in general through the mechanisms I have previously submitted.[/QUOTE] What about in Portugal? They decriminalized drug use, addiction plummeted
[QUOTE=cody8295;48661618]What about in Portugal? They decriminalized drug use, addiction plummeted[/QUOTE] Huh. Wasn't aware of that. Seems to have been a pretty good outcome on most measures too.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48661760]Huh. Wasn't aware of that. Seems to have been a pretty good outcome on most measures too.[/QUOTE] They use education, legalization, and regulation to control it. It's a massive success compared to our attempts with prohibition which empower criminal cartels.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.