Turn on thread page Beta

Cannabis watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by glassheart)
    I couldnt care less about what you do to your body, but if you do use cannabis...the law cares. :rolleyes:
    O I get it, you don't care what I do with my body and i'm free to do as I please with it but as long as the law says it's illegal it should remain illegal. By this reasoning we would still get giving electric shock therapy to gays. Circular thinking leads to an unprogressive law that doesn't reflect the people or true scientific fact.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Double standards. By having bad food in society we're showing children that it's ok to eat bad food, and boy o boy are they eating bad food. Indeed we don't even stop under 18's eating this filth and now 1/3 of them are fat... leading them into more illnesses than cannabis ever could. Surely if you followed an even vaguely logical plan you'd advocate the banning of fast food too?
    Deliberately picking holes in my argument is not going to work. I do belive the discussion is on cannabis and not fast food, I hate when people draw up parallels between the two. If I'm following a logical plan as you say, then I'd understand that fast food will and never can be banned, it's not a drug.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nothingspek)
    I was being rather sarcastic, which I thought was pretty obvious. I really don't feel the need to justify why I am a Lib Dem.
    Yeah, I caught the sarcasm, but the sarcasm implies that you think I/we are trying to tell you not to be a Lib Dem. This is not the case, I was just wondering why you call yourself such if you don't believe in their core values.

    I could call myself a Christian too, but I don't believe in Jesus Christ. Would I be a Christian?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Symbea)
    I think the main problem with weed is becoming a stoner. I think everyone can honestly admit that guys that just talk about getting stoned and doing drugs are the most dull people in existence. Many use it without problem but jeeez, some users are really irritating.

    Legalising it would increase the number of these people and no one wants that!
    More stoners wouldn't be created because the price of cannabis is directly related to its usage. If the price stays high then usage remains low. In Holland for instance there are less stoners and use is less prevalent and it's legal there. Care to have a change of heart?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spizzey)
    Yeah, I caught the sarcasm, but the sarcasm implies that you think I/we are trying to tell you not to be a Lib Dem. This is not the case, I was just wondering why you call yourself such if you don't believe in their core values.

    I could call myself a Christian too, but I don't believe in Jesus Christ. Would I be a Christian?
    Legalising cannabis is not one of their core values, it seems to be the only policy I don't agree with, which I learnt from this thread, TSR is good for something.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nothingspek)
    Deliberately picking holes in my argument is not going to work. I do belive the discussion is on cannabis and not fast food, I hate when people draw up parallels between the two. If I'm following a logical plan as you say, then I'd understand that fast food will and never can be banned, it's not a drug.
    I think time has shown us that cannabis can't be banned either though... with usage as high as 45% in America where in some states you get life imprisonment for dealing it's laughable you think prohibition could ever succeed. If all data indicates usage will be stable or go down then how can you maintain your line? Surely what you want is less cannabis used and a healthier public?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    You also haven't addressed why you should be able to tell me not to do something that harms only me? If I want to get high and turn my lungs black why is it any skin off your nose?
    It's interesting that you champing liberalism when it comes to cannabis, but explicitly support taxing 'fatty foods'. Tell me, if I want to stuff my face and screw up my pancreas, why is it any skin off your nose?

    I suspect you'll defend your position with regard to taxing fatty foods with reference to the NHS, but the same can be said about cannabis and other recreational drugs. Furthermore, if you were a genuine liberal you would support the dismantling of the NHS rather than introducing further taxes and government intervention.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nothingspek)
    Legalising cannabis is not one of their core values, it seems to be the only policy I don't agree with, which I learnt from this thread, TSR is good for something.
    Legalising cannabis is not, but decriminalising personal possession is. To be Liberal politically you surely must believe in individual liberty, which you appear not to be fond of.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spizzey)
    Legalising cannabis is not, but decriminalising personal possession is. To be Liberal politically you surely must believe in individual liberty, which you appear not to be fond of.
    Perhaps she means liberal in the American sense, not the European.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I think time has shown us that cannabis can't be banned either though... with usage as high as 45% in America where in some states you get life imprisonment for dealing it's laughable you think prohibition could ever succeed.
    Good point.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    in response to Elipsis and tis:

    Protect - Yes an adult can make there own choices, but by legalizing you do influence children. Even if it is not legalized for U18s they will still see adults doing it and this will influence them.

    Democracy - Well maybe Labour and the Conservatives always get in because people like there policy on cannabis. ANyway if lots of people really want cannabis to be legal then a party representing that would get in.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Spizzey)
    Yeah, I caught the sarcasm, but the sarcasm implies that you think I/we are trying to tell you not to be a Lib Dem. This is not the case, I was just wondering why you call yourself such if you don't believe in their core values.

    I could call myself a Christian too, but I don't believe in Jesus Christ. Would I be a Christian?
    To be fair ... it's not like the lib dems are actually liberal. If you want to see what liberal is then check my profile and boy is that a bit different to the libby demmies. But still they're kind of cute and fuzzy so worth voting for imo. (At least they take climate change seriously.)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If cannabis was legal I'd never get any work done...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Those who are claiming that their ‘liberal’ political views shape their opinions over the legalisation of cannabis take a very narrow look at the drugs trade.

    The drugs trade funds civil wars (columbia, afganistan? heard of these places), sex trafficking, slavery and the tragedy of addiction across the world. These are clearly not part of some kind of ‘libertarian’ ideal. When talking about drugs it is naïve, and frankly stupid, to act as if taking any drug is some sort of harmless action which takes place in the vacuum of your home – or even your home country. In my opinion western drug takers must accept that they are responsible for much more than the social problems that their actions cause in this country.

    Of course those who agree in drug legalisation will reply that legalising these drugs will prevent civil wars, sex trafficking (or trafficking in general) slavery etc by regulating the industry. This is not so. The drugs trade is in its very nature UNETHICAL and ILLIBERAL (as it harms so many people who have no power over the process) and legalising it will not stop this fact.

    A clear example is tobacco companies who make billions from addiction and use some of this fortune to fund distinctly unethical, immoral causes (particularly in the American political scene) and who of course try to present their product as a healthy and happy ‘lifestyle choice’ - part of the liberal choice agenda.

    I am unsure of my views about the legalisation of drugs in practice - I mainly wanted to make the point that most people in the ‘pro-legalisation’ lobby on this site are ignoring the drugs trade as a whole and see drug taking as a purely PERSONAL action.

    I also see no reason why governments should not be able to make MORAL stands about these issues – if as people say, drug use will always happen, why not make the point that it is harmful and unacceptable?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Here come the political attacks :erm:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2026)
    It's interesting that you champing liberalism when it comes to cannabis, but explicitly support taxing 'fatty foods'. Tell me, if I want to stuff my face and screw up my pancreas, why is it any skin off your nose?

    I suspect you'll defend your position with regard to taxing fatty foods with reference to the NHS, but the same can be said about cannabis and other recreational drugs. Furthermore, if you were a genuine liberal you would support the dismantling of the NHS rather than introducing further taxes and government intervention.
    Hahahahaha are you really this desperate to try and show me up? I've said consistently that cannabis when/if legalised should be taxed to pay for the burden it places through any ill health suffered by users. It's skin off my nose when people harm themselves through life choices that are avoidable and I have to pay for them, I am more than happy to pay for mine so I think everyone else should follow suit. I never claimed to be a massive liberal either tbh...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    O I get it, you don't care what I do with my body and i'm free to do as I please with it but as long as the law says it's illegal it should remain illegal. By this reasoning we would still get giving electric shock therapy to gays. Circular thinking leads to an unprogressive law that doesn't reflect the people or true scientific fact.
    How the ****** can you compare smoking weed, and that?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Rob 106)
    in response to Elipsis and tis:

    Protect - Yes an adult can make there own choices, but by legalizing you do influence children. Even if it is not legalized for U18s they will still see adults doing it and this will influence them.

    Democracy - Well maybe Labour and the Conservatives always get in because people like there policy on cannabis. ANyway if lots of people really want cannabis to be legal then a party representing that would get in.
    Again I covered this. Try buying weed in Holland when you're under 18. Coffee shops are so strict on ID and why would drug dealers sell cannabis? They don't carry any because not enough people buy it illegally when they buy it legally instead. Hence the poor children go without drugs.

    When it's illegal on the other hand, and drug dealers carry cannabis - children can easily buy some. Drug dealers are less strict on ID.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy***)
    Of course those who agree in drug legalisation will reply that legalising these drugs will prevent civil wars, sex trafficking (or trafficking in general) slavery etc by regulating the industry. This is not so. The drugs trade is in its very nature UNETHICAL and ILLIBERAL (as it harms so many people who have no power over the process) and legalising it will not stop this fact.

    A clear example is tobacco companies who make billions from addiction and use some of this fortune to fund distinctly unethical, immoral causes (particularly in the American political scene) and who of course try to present their product as a healthy and happy ‘lifestyle choice’ - part of the liberal choice agenda.
    And it would! Big Tobacco have ulterior motives sure, but they don't partake in sex trafficking.

    As for smoking tobacco being a lifestyle choice, that seems to sit perfectly with the liberal view to me. It is a lifestyle choice, in the same way that eating 10 mcdonalds a week is a lifestyle choice. I hate to draw that parallel after someone pointed out that it is a horrible analogy, but its true. I can put whatever I like into my body, its mine.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Hahahahaha are you really this desperate to try and show me up? I've said consistently that cannabis when/if legalised should be taxed to pay for the burden it places through any ill health suffered by users. It's skin off my nose when people harm themselves through life choices that are avoidable and I have to pay for them, I am more than happy to pay for mine so I think everyone else should follow suit. I never claimed to be a massive liberal either tbh...
    Then why not just get rid of the NHS? Your half-way approach is comical.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 18, 2008
Poll
Should Banksy be put in prison?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.