Legalising Cannanbis

I believe that legalising cannabis can be very beneficial to the UK. I have no doubt the economy will boom if cannabis is legalised. Not only is it going to help cut down on crime but it will also increase the amount of new businesses. Legalising it will also ensure that it is monitored and people are not being ripped off or being given a false product.

Legalising cannabis will reduce crime rates were it may have been implicated before.

Legalising cannabis is necessary for health reasons. It has so many benefits to offer a patient in need such as someone with Autism, MS or even Epilepsy. I myself suffer from complex partial seizures. I have had more seizures triggered by alcohol than cannabis. I haven't drank alcohol in years and use cannabis as a way of relaxing and kicking back after a long day at work just like people would with a bottle of Pinot Grigio. The only negative thing about smoking cannabis is that I cannot enjoy it in peublic due to the social stigma. I am not a "druggy". I have not and never will use any other drug. I have never been violent or angry towards anyone while under the influence of cannabis unlike alcohol which can contribute to misconstruing a situation.

I know quite a lot of people that smoke cannabis and the majority of them say they would pay a tax on it if it was legalised.

Give it a trial…….people are asking for it……..will our government listen?

Why is this idea important?

I believe that legalising cannabis can be very beneficial to the UK. I have no doubt the economy will boom if cannabis is legalised. Not only is it going to help cut down on crime but it will also increase the amount of new businesses. Legalising it will also ensure that it is monitored and people are not being ripped off or being given a false product.

Legalising cannabis will reduce crime rates were it may have been implicated before.

Legalising cannabis is necessary for health reasons. It has so many benefits to offer a patient in need such as someone with Autism, MS or even Epilepsy. I myself suffer from complex partial seizures. I have had more seizures triggered by alcohol than cannabis. I haven't drank alcohol in years and use cannabis as a way of relaxing and kicking back after a long day at work just like people would with a bottle of Pinot Grigio. The only negative thing about smoking cannabis is that I cannot enjoy it in peublic due to the social stigma. I am not a "druggy". I have not and never will use any other drug. I have never been violent or angry towards anyone while under the influence of cannabis unlike alcohol which can contribute to misconstruing a situation.

I know quite a lot of people that smoke cannabis and the majority of them say they would pay a tax on it if it was legalised.

Give it a trial…….people are asking for it……..will our government listen?

The credit crunch, pensions crisis, Afghanistan, transport issues & road congestion, prison overcrowding, underworld criminal empire organisations, policing budget constraints, crime

 

The credit crunch, the pensions crisis, Afghanistan, public transport issues & road congestion, prison overcrowding (& drug use in prisons), underworld criminal empire organisations, policing budget constraints, crime statistics …. and more, much more, can be solved in a single fell swoop with one simple but radical piece of thinking.
 It will require not only a daring leader, but a forward thinking and single minded one, capable of resisting the futile argument of other  until now misguided ‘leaders’ that the current applications & arguments to deal with and pay for the abovementioned problems our society faces, is the correct and best approach.

The simple and radical solution .. ?? rescind the 1971 misuse of drugs act, draft new relacement legislation to legalise all drugs.

In my country of legalised ‘drugtaking’, step 1 would be to immediately release all offenders in prison serving sentences for drug related crimes, the immediate effect would be to reduce the prison population by some 30%, a further 30% if you release the burglars and muggers who are service sentences related to their drug use, i.e. those who committed crimes in order to fund their drug habit. The secondary benefits would then be that those left in prison would very likely have no drugs use to desire whilst in prison, and reducing greatly the current drugs use in prisons to a fraction of current rates.

On release, ALL of these offenders would be offered the opportunity to purchase a licence to use drugs henceforth that would also be offered to society in general. The license would be renewed annually and would apply to individual drugs, that is to say a cocaine users license, a heroin users license, a cannabis users license, magic mushrooms, ecstasy, diazepam, morphine… et al. Multi drugs use licences would also be available.

The newly reprieved ex-offender would be warned of the very, very stiff penalties that would accompany a positive drugs test the user provided for the presence of an unlicensed for use substance. After all, the annual license fee for any individual drugs usage would be a nominal one and within the means of all, be it £10 or £50, given that they will happily pay within these amounts for ‘one night’s use’ of a particular drug of choice.

All drugs user's licence holders are signed to provide a summary drugs test periodically, anyone found with a drug in their system they are not currently licensed to use would be subject to prosecution with stiff custodial sentences as a deterrent from unlicensed usage. Licenses are available to all adults for all substances and at a fee so as to encourage licensed use.

In turn this will greatly reduce crime overall, but specifically the low priority crime that was committed exponentially by small time drugs users to fund their habits, because now they don’t have to steal or rob to pay for their drugs of choice, instead now the government would be selling them their ‘clean’, ‘measured’, ‘certified’ and legal dose at a very reasonable rate, but with high returning revenues and built in profit margins.

Instead of waking in the morning and having to go break a window to raise money for his morning fix, your user in my world of legalised drugs use would already have his fix to hand, before then toddling off to his mundane, no risk gainful employment and instead of his small, but significant, part of adding to the constant rises in insurance premiums and ever escalating social welfare costs. Of course he would never be a fully functioning ‘high end’ earner paying thousands in income tax, but no longer draining the economy on multiple facets and indeed, contributing. He would of course not be able to work a full 8 hour day as a result of his habit, but mutual accommodations could easily be reached on him being allowed time to go have his afternoon fix by getting to the end of his working day after 6 hours, for sake of any figure over none.

The knock on effect on police hours would be almost astronomical in the time it would free up to catch many, many fewer offenders committing fewer crimes.

Whilst on the subject of crime, this would hasten the demise of criminal gangs and organised crime which relies on the £billions spent every year that funds the empires. Of course, with the government being the sole supplier, it would have every right to heap harsh reprisal on anyone muscling in on its territory and the selling of drugs would be seen on a par with anyone using drugs without the proper licence to do so, incurring the same stiff penalties if caught doing so (note; alcohol, nicotine and caffeine are considered by the writer to be drugs that would also require license for use with separate secondary licences available for production, such as home wine making or beer brewing. The writer would refrain from adding cannabis to a list of licensed home produced drugs and sets out the proposed approach in a further section of this document.)

It is then plain even for the blind to see that the police would have a lot less to do with no need to chase after people with what is effectively flowering heads from an illegal plant, by far the most used illegal drug in the UK currently. Added to that the reduction in petty crime and more serious crimes resulting from users trying to fund a habit on stealing and damaging property taken out of the policing equation, would allow for a more concentrated effort on solving non drugs related crime, as well as having a significant effect on the insurance industry, delivering a slowdown to the annual hike in premiums caused as a result of the criminal practices of drug taking criminals.

Licensing use of narcotic substances would conflict with all road safety matters and therefore drugs use of any kind cannot be combined with a license to drive, so society would be given the choice of a drugs use licence or a driving licence. Not everyone will opt for drugs use, not everyone will opt to drive, however many will take up the offer of taking drugs legally in favour of losing the license to drive and this will produce the effective decongestion of the roads by reducing the licensed users dramatically, allowing and encouraging the mass migration to fuller use of the public transport systems.

This country is currently ploughing money into Afghanistan in order to try and create a democratic society, however, Afghanistan is a country with no natural industry, no cohesive society that can even be used as cheap labour such as india, china etc, no resources save for its one major export…  heroin/opium. Then let's buy their heroin, and that way any money we plough into Afghanistan would be for a produce and allow the country to be a self sufficient one using its one natural resource to fund its own regenration and save us billions that we currently do to subsidise a build to no end or value. Instead of soldiers patroling the peace, teams of buyers would ensure that the farmers would receive the money for the opium crop, dealing only with the above board and legitimate government licenced opium producers, to stop terrorist factions from gaining from the trading or corrupt officials profiting from their positions.

I propose only the government grows cannabis… no 'for personal use' growing as there is in Holland. Cannabis should be grown in bonded warehouses and any home growing should be met with very stiff penalties so that every ounce grown can be sold with the tax paid. There should be restrictions on who can work in the bonded warehouses… only those of a pensionable age should be able to work in bonded cannabis growing warehouses, this would have the double bonus of keeping the elderly vital as well as taking them off the annual pensions payout. Of course there is no requirement to work in the bonded warehouses after reaching pensionable age, however the incentive of continuing to work and earn would not only reduce the pensions deficit, but would also raise revenue in the form of an income tax, albeit at a reduced taxable rate.

 

Now that we have embraced the sensible option of legalising all drugs to solve the many issues, expense and troubles drugs use causes as well as address a few other social issues we suffer from, we can expand thinking and actually make it a very lucrative policy indeed; let's invite the world to come to our country with their hard earned spending money by being the first country to encourage drugs tourism..  of course, the first thing they would have to do on arrival would be to apply for and PAY for a users licence and a tourist's drugs user's insurance policy… a tourist drugs users licence would of course be at a premium rate and temporary for the duration of their stay so that should they return again within any given timeframe they would have to re-purchase another licence.

 

It is a matter of debate as to whether drugs such as heroin, cannabis, ecstacy, cocaine et al being 'controlled drugs' is an oxymoron or simply a misnomer… for they are certainly not controlled, indeed the very fact that we have such a problem with the current controls is testament to this… let's get control of drugs by taking control of drugs use.

Why is this idea important?

 

The credit crunch, the pensions crisis, Afghanistan, public transport issues & road congestion, prison overcrowding (& drug use in prisons), underworld criminal empire organisations, policing budget constraints, crime statistics …. and more, much more, can be solved in a single fell swoop with one simple but radical piece of thinking.
 It will require not only a daring leader, but a forward thinking and single minded one, capable of resisting the futile argument of other  until now misguided ‘leaders’ that the current applications & arguments to deal with and pay for the abovementioned problems our society faces, is the correct and best approach.

The simple and radical solution .. ?? rescind the 1971 misuse of drugs act, draft new relacement legislation to legalise all drugs.

In my country of legalised ‘drugtaking’, step 1 would be to immediately release all offenders in prison serving sentences for drug related crimes, the immediate effect would be to reduce the prison population by some 30%, a further 30% if you release the burglars and muggers who are service sentences related to their drug use, i.e. those who committed crimes in order to fund their drug habit. The secondary benefits would then be that those left in prison would very likely have no drugs use to desire whilst in prison, and reducing greatly the current drugs use in prisons to a fraction of current rates.

On release, ALL of these offenders would be offered the opportunity to purchase a licence to use drugs henceforth that would also be offered to society in general. The license would be renewed annually and would apply to individual drugs, that is to say a cocaine users license, a heroin users license, a cannabis users license, magic mushrooms, ecstasy, diazepam, morphine… et al. Multi drugs use licences would also be available.

The newly reprieved ex-offender would be warned of the very, very stiff penalties that would accompany a positive drugs test the user provided for the presence of an unlicensed for use substance. After all, the annual license fee for any individual drugs usage would be a nominal one and within the means of all, be it £10 or £50, given that they will happily pay within these amounts for ‘one night’s use’ of a particular drug of choice.

All drugs user's licence holders are signed to provide a summary drugs test periodically, anyone found with a drug in their system they are not currently licensed to use would be subject to prosecution with stiff custodial sentences as a deterrent from unlicensed usage. Licenses are available to all adults for all substances and at a fee so as to encourage licensed use.

In turn this will greatly reduce crime overall, but specifically the low priority crime that was committed exponentially by small time drugs users to fund their habits, because now they don’t have to steal or rob to pay for their drugs of choice, instead now the government would be selling them their ‘clean’, ‘measured’, ‘certified’ and legal dose at a very reasonable rate, but with high returning revenues and built in profit margins.

Instead of waking in the morning and having to go break a window to raise money for his morning fix, your user in my world of legalised drugs use would already have his fix to hand, before then toddling off to his mundane, no risk gainful employment and instead of his small, but significant, part of adding to the constant rises in insurance premiums and ever escalating social welfare costs. Of course he would never be a fully functioning ‘high end’ earner paying thousands in income tax, but no longer draining the economy on multiple facets and indeed, contributing. He would of course not be able to work a full 8 hour day as a result of his habit, but mutual accommodations could easily be reached on him being allowed time to go have his afternoon fix by getting to the end of his working day after 6 hours, for sake of any figure over none.

The knock on effect on police hours would be almost astronomical in the time it would free up to catch many, many fewer offenders committing fewer crimes.

Whilst on the subject of crime, this would hasten the demise of criminal gangs and organised crime which relies on the £billions spent every year that funds the empires. Of course, with the government being the sole supplier, it would have every right to heap harsh reprisal on anyone muscling in on its territory and the selling of drugs would be seen on a par with anyone using drugs without the proper licence to do so, incurring the same stiff penalties if caught doing so (note; alcohol, nicotine and caffeine are considered by the writer to be drugs that would also require license for use with separate secondary licences available for production, such as home wine making or beer brewing. The writer would refrain from adding cannabis to a list of licensed home produced drugs and sets out the proposed approach in a further section of this document.)

It is then plain even for the blind to see that the police would have a lot less to do with no need to chase after people with what is effectively flowering heads from an illegal plant, by far the most used illegal drug in the UK currently. Added to that the reduction in petty crime and more serious crimes resulting from users trying to fund a habit on stealing and damaging property taken out of the policing equation, would allow for a more concentrated effort on solving non drugs related crime, as well as having a significant effect on the insurance industry, delivering a slowdown to the annual hike in premiums caused as a result of the criminal practices of drug taking criminals.

Licensing use of narcotic substances would conflict with all road safety matters and therefore drugs use of any kind cannot be combined with a license to drive, so society would be given the choice of a drugs use licence or a driving licence. Not everyone will opt for drugs use, not everyone will opt to drive, however many will take up the offer of taking drugs legally in favour of losing the license to drive and this will produce the effective decongestion of the roads by reducing the licensed users dramatically, allowing and encouraging the mass migration to fuller use of the public transport systems.

This country is currently ploughing money into Afghanistan in order to try and create a democratic society, however, Afghanistan is a country with no natural industry, no cohesive society that can even be used as cheap labour such as india, china etc, no resources save for its one major export…  heroin/opium. Then let's buy their heroin, and that way any money we plough into Afghanistan would be for a produce and allow the country to be a self sufficient one using its one natural resource to fund its own regenration and save us billions that we currently do to subsidise a build to no end or value. Instead of soldiers patroling the peace, teams of buyers would ensure that the farmers would receive the money for the opium crop, dealing only with the above board and legitimate government licenced opium producers, to stop terrorist factions from gaining from the trading or corrupt officials profiting from their positions.

I propose only the government grows cannabis… no 'for personal use' growing as there is in Holland. Cannabis should be grown in bonded warehouses and any home growing should be met with very stiff penalties so that every ounce grown can be sold with the tax paid. There should be restrictions on who can work in the bonded warehouses… only those of a pensionable age should be able to work in bonded cannabis growing warehouses, this would have the double bonus of keeping the elderly vital as well as taking them off the annual pensions payout. Of course there is no requirement to work in the bonded warehouses after reaching pensionable age, however the incentive of continuing to work and earn would not only reduce the pensions deficit, but would also raise revenue in the form of an income tax, albeit at a reduced taxable rate.

 

Now that we have embraced the sensible option of legalising all drugs to solve the many issues, expense and troubles drugs use causes as well as address a few other social issues we suffer from, we can expand thinking and actually make it a very lucrative policy indeed; let's invite the world to come to our country with their hard earned spending money by being the first country to encourage drugs tourism..  of course, the first thing they would have to do on arrival would be to apply for and PAY for a users licence and a tourist's drugs user's insurance policy… a tourist drugs users licence would of course be at a premium rate and temporary for the duration of their stay so that should they return again within any given timeframe they would have to re-purchase another licence.

 

It is a matter of debate as to whether drugs such as heroin, cannabis, ecstacy, cocaine et al being 'controlled drugs' is an oxymoron or simply a misnomer… for they are certainly not controlled, indeed the very fact that we have such a problem with the current controls is testament to this… let's get control of drugs by taking control of drugs use.

How can i be arrested under MDA

If i am caught with cannabis by the police, how can i be charged for being in possesion of a controlled substance when cannabis is clearly not controlled?

I suggest that anyone from now on whom is arrested – that when the police advise you you have been arrested for being in possesion of a controlled substance – that you point out to the police that it is not the case, as cannabis is not a controlled substance but rather an uncontrolled substance.

Alcohol is a controlled substance and so is tobbaco as they are only available to persons of age and are controlled by strick guidlines – no selling alcohol or tobbaco to minors

Why is this idea important?

If i am caught with cannabis by the police, how can i be charged for being in possesion of a controlled substance when cannabis is clearly not controlled?

I suggest that anyone from now on whom is arrested – that when the police advise you you have been arrested for being in possesion of a controlled substance – that you point out to the police that it is not the case, as cannabis is not a controlled substance but rather an uncontrolled substance.

Alcohol is a controlled substance and so is tobbaco as they are only available to persons of age and are controlled by strick guidlines – no selling alcohol or tobbaco to minors

How can i be arrested under MDA

If i am caught with cannabis by the police, how can i be charged for being in possesion of a controlled substance when cannabis is clearly not controlled?

I suggest that anyone from now on whom is arrested – that when the police advise you you have been arrested for being in possesion of a controlled substance – that you point out to the police that it is not the case, as cannabis is not a controlled substance but rather an uncontrolled substance.

Alcohol is a controlled substance and so is tobbaco as they are only available to persons of age and are controlled by strick guidlines – no selling alcohol or tobbaco to minors

Why is this idea important?

If i am caught with cannabis by the police, how can i be charged for being in possesion of a controlled substance when cannabis is clearly not controlled?

I suggest that anyone from now on whom is arrested – that when the police advise you you have been arrested for being in possesion of a controlled substance – that you point out to the police that it is not the case, as cannabis is not a controlled substance but rather an uncontrolled substance.

Alcohol is a controlled substance and so is tobbaco as they are only available to persons of age and are controlled by strick guidlines – no selling alcohol or tobbaco to minors

cannabisvote

put the use of cannabis to public vote.mr cameron you have tried it and now your pm.what harm has it done you..there is no control over it but there could be…..

,

Why is this idea important?

put the use of cannabis to public vote.mr cameron you have tried it and now your pm.what harm has it done you..there is no control over it but there could be…..

,

Fools Gold

Hello, I am autistic. In real terms, day to day, this means that I am an annoying character. It is difficult to hold down a job because I am so rude and annoying. This rudeness is like a tick, similar to the uncontrolled swearing which is popluarised by tourettes people.

When I use cannabis, this problem goes aways and I am able to lead a normal productive life.

However, being autistic and poor, it is nearly impossible to maintain a decent supply.

Don't bother telling yourself that I am insane and that I don't know which medicines to take. Walk 38 years in my shoes if you want an opinion on my health, fitness, food and medical needs. If you don't believe me, google it. We are rude, but we are not liars.

We consider the restriction of our supply of medicine to be a hostile act towards us, peace-loving people who want nothing more than to be free to express our peaceful sides, whatever it takes.

We fear that that you wish to harm us with your laws. Therefore, all who support the criminalisation of Cannabis are Terrorists who are aiming their terror campaign at some of the most vulnerable members of your society.

While we are at it, the surest way to create terrorists is to restrict food and medicine supplies in someone else's county. Isn't that obvious?

Sorry to be so rude. Please hurry up with the medical research, don't let the cost put you off.

Draconian Drug laws are fuelling theft, murder, suicide and paranoia throughout the world. Please consider legalising all Drugs, or at least allow individual countries to decide for themselves.

Why is this idea important?

Hello, I am autistic. In real terms, day to day, this means that I am an annoying character. It is difficult to hold down a job because I am so rude and annoying. This rudeness is like a tick, similar to the uncontrolled swearing which is popluarised by tourettes people.

When I use cannabis, this problem goes aways and I am able to lead a normal productive life.

However, being autistic and poor, it is nearly impossible to maintain a decent supply.

Don't bother telling yourself that I am insane and that I don't know which medicines to take. Walk 38 years in my shoes if you want an opinion on my health, fitness, food and medical needs. If you don't believe me, google it. We are rude, but we are not liars.

We consider the restriction of our supply of medicine to be a hostile act towards us, peace-loving people who want nothing more than to be free to express our peaceful sides, whatever it takes.

We fear that that you wish to harm us with your laws. Therefore, all who support the criminalisation of Cannabis are Terrorists who are aiming their terror campaign at some of the most vulnerable members of your society.

While we are at it, the surest way to create terrorists is to restrict food and medicine supplies in someone else's county. Isn't that obvious?

Sorry to be so rude. Please hurry up with the medical research, don't let the cost put you off.

Draconian Drug laws are fuelling theft, murder, suicide and paranoia throughout the world. Please consider legalising all Drugs, or at least allow individual countries to decide for themselves.

Legalise all Drugs

I believe not all drugs, even the harmful ones should be legalised. Why? Because while something is illegal there is NO regulation of it. Which is why it is so harmful to users and so profitable to sellers.

Legalisation does not have to mean encourage the use of drugs. It can mean make it a medical problem, rather then a legal one, when the only person an addict harms through their drug use is themselves. All drug related crime, be it addicts stealing for a fix or gang related crime, all come from the legal status of drugs. If there was legal, safe, regulated access to drugs, then the only problem remaining is treating the addicts. Which would be far cheaper for the tax payer then funding a hopeless drug war. Especially considering the potential money there is to be made from taxing the mostly harmless drugs such as cannabis.

The final point I have to make is that it is very foolish to keeps drugs illegal when after years of fighting to end drug use it has only inreased. It is impossible to stop people using drugs. Even in places such as China where drug users are executed, there are still plenty who use them anyway.

So please, lets change our drug policy from one based on racism and propaganda to one based on scientific evidence. Before too much damage is done.

Why is this idea important?

I believe not all drugs, even the harmful ones should be legalised. Why? Because while something is illegal there is NO regulation of it. Which is why it is so harmful to users and so profitable to sellers.

Legalisation does not have to mean encourage the use of drugs. It can mean make it a medical problem, rather then a legal one, when the only person an addict harms through their drug use is themselves. All drug related crime, be it addicts stealing for a fix or gang related crime, all come from the legal status of drugs. If there was legal, safe, regulated access to drugs, then the only problem remaining is treating the addicts. Which would be far cheaper for the tax payer then funding a hopeless drug war. Especially considering the potential money there is to be made from taxing the mostly harmless drugs such as cannabis.

The final point I have to make is that it is very foolish to keeps drugs illegal when after years of fighting to end drug use it has only inreased. It is impossible to stop people using drugs. Even in places such as China where drug users are executed, there are still plenty who use them anyway.

So please, lets change our drug policy from one based on racism and propaganda to one based on scientific evidence. Before too much damage is done.

The Truth about Cannabis

 

Quite frankly, i'm shocked with society, the way people are forced to be materialistic and promote the destruction of the planet all for this precious 'profit'. I'm not a naturist but as Joe Rogan said, 'If an alien looked at earth and saw western civilization from space, it would look identical to a living organism infected with cancer.' Industrialization is like any other substance, best in moderation. 

Although, not all is bad, there is such a plant which has unprecedented potential. From clothing to food, Medicine to bio-fuel or simply using it for recreational purposes. Cannabis is quite literally a fuel for life. Furthermore there is a clear difference between harmful drugs such as Coke Heroin and Alcohol compared to cannabis which is harmful drugs have to be refined. Alcohol must go through a distillery similar to Coke and heroin. 

It is easy to see the effects of harmful drugs on society, Look at the rates of drink driving and assault motivated purely by alcoholic rage. I agree that most alcohol consumers are kind, but so are the majority of coke users, they just don't tell you they use the substance. 

In my opinion, It should be a crime to illegalize any natural substance due to its presence being proof that its existence is harmonious and most likely beneficial to our ecosystem. 

In conclusion, Please do whatever you can to help legalize Cannabis, too many innocent lives are ruined by the countries stern anti-cannbis laws and whos ambitions are crushed by the people who promised better chances. No Victim No Crime.

P.S. Please visit http://www.phoenixtears.ca/article/resources/links/granny-s-list/grannys-list.html It lists all of the scientific studies into the effects of Cannabis. 

P.P.S Im very proud of that source, there is so much evidence it is ludicrous to doubt the medical benefits of Cannabis anymore,

Why is this idea important?

 

Quite frankly, i'm shocked with society, the way people are forced to be materialistic and promote the destruction of the planet all for this precious 'profit'. I'm not a naturist but as Joe Rogan said, 'If an alien looked at earth and saw western civilization from space, it would look identical to a living organism infected with cancer.' Industrialization is like any other substance, best in moderation. 

Although, not all is bad, there is such a plant which has unprecedented potential. From clothing to food, Medicine to bio-fuel or simply using it for recreational purposes. Cannabis is quite literally a fuel for life. Furthermore there is a clear difference between harmful drugs such as Coke Heroin and Alcohol compared to cannabis which is harmful drugs have to be refined. Alcohol must go through a distillery similar to Coke and heroin. 

It is easy to see the effects of harmful drugs on society, Look at the rates of drink driving and assault motivated purely by alcoholic rage. I agree that most alcohol consumers are kind, but so are the majority of coke users, they just don't tell you they use the substance. 

In my opinion, It should be a crime to illegalize any natural substance due to its presence being proof that its existence is harmonious and most likely beneficial to our ecosystem. 

In conclusion, Please do whatever you can to help legalize Cannabis, too many innocent lives are ruined by the countries stern anti-cannbis laws and whos ambitions are crushed by the people who promised better chances. No Victim No Crime.

P.S. Please visit http://www.phoenixtears.ca/article/resources/links/granny-s-list/grannys-list.html It lists all of the scientific studies into the effects of Cannabis. 

P.P.S Im very proud of that source, there is so much evidence it is ludicrous to doubt the medical benefits of Cannabis anymore,

Legalisation of cannabis – follow the Dutch method. Limited number of plants per household, no artificial light to be used in production

The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed.  There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts.  If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met.  The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:

1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.

2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).

By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented.  the options for legalisation are:

1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).

2. Controlled legalisation.

I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation.  If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues.  Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse).  These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.

I feel that this method would work.  We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely).  You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.

If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops.  These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit.  It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.

Why is this idea important?

The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed.  There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts.  If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met.  The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:

1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.

2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).

By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented.  the options for legalisation are:

1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).

2. Controlled legalisation.

I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation.  If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues.  Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse).  These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.

I feel that this method would work.  We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely).  You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.

If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops.  These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit.  It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.

government should grow and sell cannabis in government owned shops.

I suggest the Government takes control of the cannabis market. 

Using the best technology and science you/we can grow the best herbal cannabis.  The Government can then open coffee shop style shops in which to sell the product. Thus keeping 100% profit. The product would also be taxed.  All of  which would result in millions of pounds being raised for the Uk economy.

AAlso millions would be saved in policing/court costs etc.

Millions of decent people would then have their civil liberties restored and be free to spend their money and time as they choose without the fear of being arrested.

The criminal gangs would lose millions of pounds and power and the opportunity to engage with normal people.

Tjobs would be created working in the shops and greenhouses, 

 

.

This 

Why is this idea important?

I suggest the Government takes control of the cannabis market. 

Using the best technology and science you/we can grow the best herbal cannabis.  The Government can then open coffee shop style shops in which to sell the product. Thus keeping 100% profit. The product would also be taxed.  All of  which would result in millions of pounds being raised for the Uk economy.

AAlso millions would be saved in policing/court costs etc.

Millions of decent people would then have their civil liberties restored and be free to spend their money and time as they choose without the fear of being arrested.

The criminal gangs would lose millions of pounds and power and the opportunity to engage with normal people.

Tjobs would be created working in the shops and greenhouses, 

 

.

This 

Remove the needless prohibition on drugs.

Remove the prohibition on drugs, this would allow for the government to quality control as well as make sure it doesn’t become easily available to children.

 

I don't know exactly how much it costs to search and penalise drug users and dealers, the figures I found estimate it to be around £500million per year.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/09/03/fresh-thinking-on-the-war-on-drugs/

 

The people arrested would then need to be imprisoned, this can add to the annual cost of the prison services as well as contribute towards prisons becoming overcrowded. Fewer prisons would need to be made, this saving further money for the country and more space available for homes/buildings.

 

Like alcohol it would need to be regulated and only licenced premises would be entitled to sell the product, depending on the drug to how much can be sold to an individual during a time period. Like alcohol, if the supplier feels that the person has bought too much for his own health then they would politely refuse the sale. Also like paracetamol, there can be restrictions on the amount purchased in one sale.

 

The prohibition helps to artificially inflate the price of the product; this can help fund illegal activities due to the profit that comes with products being sold in the 'black market'.

Without the prohibition the price of the product could be reduced, the reduction of the price would result in lower profits for the 'black market traders', thus removing a lot of traders who use it purely for a 'cash crop'.

 

As previously mentioned, the quality control can be implemented so that drugs would be less dangerous due to harmful substances included to pack out the weight.

Due to it being sold via legal regulated methods, the sales person should check to make sure it does not get into the hands of minors who are going through physiological maturity.

 

This would also fit into the scheme of more freedom for the individual who can purchase the product legally to consume; it should be only 'adults' who can purchase it and adults should be allowed the freedom to choose what they like to do to their own bodies.

 

If it was also legalised there can be tax added onto the product, this can equate to a very large figure annually.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-high-tech-success-against-soft-drugs

The site makes reference to 'soft drugs' being sold in Holland making an annual profit of 2 billion euros; this can be increased in the UK by including a larger scale of drugs, including 'hard drugs'.

 

We would need expert advice on how to distribute the products so it is easily available but not in open view of minors who can be easily persuaded by peer pressure.

 

The production of these products would also need to be regulated like current pharmasies regulate current legal drugs, which would include health warnings and guidelines of usage. Also the health and safty of the work place (place of production) would also ensure the safty of equipment used, reducing further risk to people not involved.

 

Due to a possable increase in health cost, part of the the profit from these products can go towards the medical care. This can also include help and advise on how to give up the addiction, like smokers can get help from there local GP.

Why is this idea important?

Remove the prohibition on drugs, this would allow for the government to quality control as well as make sure it doesn’t become easily available to children.

 

I don't know exactly how much it costs to search and penalise drug users and dealers, the figures I found estimate it to be around £500million per year.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/09/03/fresh-thinking-on-the-war-on-drugs/

 

The people arrested would then need to be imprisoned, this can add to the annual cost of the prison services as well as contribute towards prisons becoming overcrowded. Fewer prisons would need to be made, this saving further money for the country and more space available for homes/buildings.

 

Like alcohol it would need to be regulated and only licenced premises would be entitled to sell the product, depending on the drug to how much can be sold to an individual during a time period. Like alcohol, if the supplier feels that the person has bought too much for his own health then they would politely refuse the sale. Also like paracetamol, there can be restrictions on the amount purchased in one sale.

 

The prohibition helps to artificially inflate the price of the product; this can help fund illegal activities due to the profit that comes with products being sold in the 'black market'.

Without the prohibition the price of the product could be reduced, the reduction of the price would result in lower profits for the 'black market traders', thus removing a lot of traders who use it purely for a 'cash crop'.

 

As previously mentioned, the quality control can be implemented so that drugs would be less dangerous due to harmful substances included to pack out the weight.

Due to it being sold via legal regulated methods, the sales person should check to make sure it does not get into the hands of minors who are going through physiological maturity.

 

This would also fit into the scheme of more freedom for the individual who can purchase the product legally to consume; it should be only 'adults' who can purchase it and adults should be allowed the freedom to choose what they like to do to their own bodies.

 

If it was also legalised there can be tax added onto the product, this can equate to a very large figure annually.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/dutch-high-tech-success-against-soft-drugs

The site makes reference to 'soft drugs' being sold in Holland making an annual profit of 2 billion euros; this can be increased in the UK by including a larger scale of drugs, including 'hard drugs'.

 

We would need expert advice on how to distribute the products so it is easily available but not in open view of minors who can be easily persuaded by peer pressure.

 

The production of these products would also need to be regulated like current pharmasies regulate current legal drugs, which would include health warnings and guidelines of usage. Also the health and safty of the work place (place of production) would also ensure the safty of equipment used, reducing further risk to people not involved.

 

Due to a possable increase in health cost, part of the the profit from these products can go towards the medical care. This can also include help and advise on how to give up the addiction, like smokers can get help from there local GP.

Declassification of Psilocybin & Psilocin producing fungi (Magic Mushrooms)

 

Clearly magic mushrooms are a mind altering drug and so should not be abused or misused, just like alcohol should not and that's why there are many laws surrounding alcohol. Similar laws should be in place with magic mushrooms. Just like with alcohol there should be a minimum age for consumption, for example 18 years, to purchase or consume them. Just as with alcohol, only shops licenced to do so, should be allowed, protecting the consumer, and helping to fund the government in fighting real crime.

Mushrooms should also be grown solely by licenced growers who's premises are checked to ensure they are being grown in conditions without potentially harmful contaminants and that only licenced species of mushroom are being sold.

finally, they should come with warnings and education, just as with alcohol. Warnings for the side effects, people who should not consume them, how they should be taken and situations it might be unsafe etc.

 If all these measures were put into place, the government could have complete control of the situation, taking it out of the hands of criminals, educating people of the risks rather than ignoring them and allowing individuals to continue a practice that has gone on for over 11,000 years

Why is this idea important?

 

Clearly magic mushrooms are a mind altering drug and so should not be abused or misused, just like alcohol should not and that's why there are many laws surrounding alcohol. Similar laws should be in place with magic mushrooms. Just like with alcohol there should be a minimum age for consumption, for example 18 years, to purchase or consume them. Just as with alcohol, only shops licenced to do so, should be allowed, protecting the consumer, and helping to fund the government in fighting real crime.

Mushrooms should also be grown solely by licenced growers who's premises are checked to ensure they are being grown in conditions without potentially harmful contaminants and that only licenced species of mushroom are being sold.

finally, they should come with warnings and education, just as with alcohol. Warnings for the side effects, people who should not consume them, how they should be taken and situations it might be unsafe etc.

 If all these measures were put into place, the government could have complete control of the situation, taking it out of the hands of criminals, educating people of the risks rather than ignoring them and allowing individuals to continue a practice that has gone on for over 11,000 years

Decriminalisation of all substances.

It is time we realise that the War on Drugs is not only unwinnable, but is at its core incredibly immoral by providing massive amounts of profit for organised criminality and turning in many cases otherwise law abiding, tax paying and fully fuctioning members of society into criminals.

Why is this idea important?

It is time we realise that the War on Drugs is not only unwinnable, but is at its core incredibly immoral by providing massive amounts of profit for organised criminality and turning in many cases otherwise law abiding, tax paying and fully fuctioning members of society into criminals.

Legalisation of drugs

It is a fairly substantiated scientific claim that legalising drugs would be beneficial to the country for several reasons:

1) It takes the illegal trade in drugs out of the hands of criminal gangs and into the government

2) The govt makes plenty of money through the sale of tobacco and alcohol, both of which kill far more each year than all illegal drugs combined, why not make a bit of money from legalising the rest

3) Although some are extremely dangerous such as heroin and crack, most illegal drugs are much safer than alcohol. Cannabis is 'healthier' than tobacco and hallucinogenics are almost all completely harmless. Drugs are made illegal not on the basis of scientific fact as they should be, but on political bias.

4) Evidence of the political bias is on blatent show in the farce that was the banning of mephadrone and the resignation of professor Nutt along with various other members of the ACMD

5)Legalising the drugs that people take makes it far easier for them to seek and obtain medical help. It is far easier for someone to get help overcoming addiction if the drug they are addicted to is not illegal to obtain or possess.

6) Portugal is a case study where the possession of most drugs has been legalised and it has witnessed a decline in the number of deaths each year from drugs

I all this not as someone who takes drugs nor wants to in the future and in a perfect world there would be no drugs nor a market for them. However this is not a perfect world and so the correct methods must be used to solve the problem, not subpar methods used because the public perceives them as right. Education, not criminalisation, is way to achieve this and education can only come after decriminalisation of drugs.

Why is this idea important?

It is a fairly substantiated scientific claim that legalising drugs would be beneficial to the country for several reasons:

1) It takes the illegal trade in drugs out of the hands of criminal gangs and into the government

2) The govt makes plenty of money through the sale of tobacco and alcohol, both of which kill far more each year than all illegal drugs combined, why not make a bit of money from legalising the rest

3) Although some are extremely dangerous such as heroin and crack, most illegal drugs are much safer than alcohol. Cannabis is 'healthier' than tobacco and hallucinogenics are almost all completely harmless. Drugs are made illegal not on the basis of scientific fact as they should be, but on political bias.

4) Evidence of the political bias is on blatent show in the farce that was the banning of mephadrone and the resignation of professor Nutt along with various other members of the ACMD

5)Legalising the drugs that people take makes it far easier for them to seek and obtain medical help. It is far easier for someone to get help overcoming addiction if the drug they are addicted to is not illegal to obtain or possess.

6) Portugal is a case study where the possession of most drugs has been legalised and it has witnessed a decline in the number of deaths each year from drugs

I all this not as someone who takes drugs nor wants to in the future and in a perfect world there would be no drugs nor a market for them. However this is not a perfect world and so the correct methods must be used to solve the problem, not subpar methods used because the public perceives them as right. Education, not criminalisation, is way to achieve this and education can only come after decriminalisation of drugs.

Motion Pertaining To The Legalisation Of Cannabis.

It is no secret that the decades old process of prohibition has failed completely to limit the distribution and use of cannabis throughout the UK. The only people to have ever benefited from the policy of prohibition has been and continues to be the black market criminal. Instead of taking advantage of the massive revenue of the entire cannabis trade, the UK prefers to hand this golden egg to criminals. Thus such revenue streams disappear, never to benefit British society while simultaneously, we feed the black market in a never ending viscous circle.

As the law stands on narcotic legislation, a drug is to be criminalised if it poses a direct risk to society and the individual. Taking this into account, cannabis cannot possibly constitute an equal risk to society or the individual as that of alcohol. Alcohol kills more people in the UK than any other illegal drug put together. It places an immeasurable stress on the NHS, results in open violence in our streets and homes, is the cause of much misery and crime and addicts the user relatively easily. Yet it is legal, despite the law. As Cannabis does none of the above, in fact it promotes a more harmonious way of life, why is the government telling society that the only choice for rest and relaxation is a drug more dangerous than the alternative? Why are we forced into drinking as the only legal means of getting high? As an adult, one should be able to have a choice in what they wish to indulge in, in terms of rest and relaxation substances. It is simply unethical and unjust to state that alcohol is a more acceptable drug than cannabis.

Our prisons are over crowded forcing the government to lessen the deterrent effect of prison in general and allowing some violent offenders to serve less time or not go in to prison at all. The effect of legalisation in terms of lessening the prison population would be significant. Indeed, current prisoners incarcerated for cultivation or possession could be viewed as "prisoners of conscience" as their crime hurts nobody and therefore is a victimless crime. The police would also benefit by being able to divert their resources to serious crime instead. It is no secret that the arrest of a cannabis user is an easy way to artificially raise crime statistics in the UK. It is morally and ethically wrong to criminalise a person for choosing to relax by using cannabis. Other than this one grey area, the user is statistically a perfectly law abiding, tax paying and upstanding citizen. It is unjust in the extreme to criminalise the adult individual and force them in to the shadows of a society that they fully contribute to and do no harm to what so ever. Such a move as legalisation would reflect favourably on our society by emancipating millions of people to live life in the open as legitimate citizens, beneficial to society.

The medical use of cannabis is well documented and successfully launched in several states in the USA as well as in other European countries. Cannabis has substantial medical qualities and eases the life of millions for a multitude of different illnesses. Why is it that the government insists that our society base itself solely on pharmaceutical drugs when they cause such terrible side effects? There is, as millions will concur, a far safer, 100% natural and more enjoyable alternative. Cannabis is cheaper to produce and more effective at easing the ailments of the sick user. Now, we all know that smoking is bad for you, yet there is still no argument that therefore, cannabis is bad for you as it can be consumed orally or by means of a vaporizer with no medical consequences. Again, it is unjust, unsympathetic, unethical and immoral to deprive the sick of a drug that is proven to be of such medicinal value. As for the argument of cannabis and schizophrenia, well that is simply nonsense. Scientific research has proven a 2% risk of permanent mental dis-function in regular users. Therefore, such risks are insignificant when balanced against the risks associated with alcohol. Are we really such a society that would prefer to criminalise the sick instead of help them by any means possible? I refuse to think so and live in hope that our collective humanity and decency will eventually make it’s way to the parliamentary table.

Taking our current economic crisis into account, has the time not finally arrived when necessity dictates that cannabis is legalised and regulated through proper medical channels and taxed? Britain could help to solve her debt crisis almost over night; massively increased tax revenue, an explosion of new small to medium businesses, increased tourism, decreased prison population, freed up police force, the advancement of British medical science and an increase of GDP within the UK Hemp industry. Currently 100% of all this cash goes straight into the hands of the black market, benefiting nobody but the criminal and that is, frankly, a senseless waist of revenue. There are currently 6 million adult cannabis user’s in the UK and 11 million casual adult users. Being government statistics, one can assume a much higher real usage throughout Britain. To deny the country such a massive instant revenue windfall in a time of such austerity is madness. The maths is not difficult, legalisation makes rational sense. Is it not time for the UK to collectively wake up to the reality of the situation and consider another far more reasonable, rational and ethical approach to managing the issue of social drug use?

We could liberate millions while simultaneously improving our economy and society. Instead of being seen as an evil psychotic menace perhaps cannabis will one day be seen as our saving grace. At the same time society will see that adults are able to self regulate and children will lose interest due to the lifting of the magnetic effect of a teenager and an illegal substance mixed with greater regulation and a reduction in the black market. Britain would follow Holland in years to come whereby they would have among the lowest population of drug abusers in the world.

I hope that I have been able to convince you of the merits of cannabis legalisation. In my opinion, it is a simple, rational and logical argument for the social equality of millions of our citizens. It is the just and correct thing to do in a modern and apparently open society.

Why is this idea important?

It is no secret that the decades old process of prohibition has failed completely to limit the distribution and use of cannabis throughout the UK. The only people to have ever benefited from the policy of prohibition has been and continues to be the black market criminal. Instead of taking advantage of the massive revenue of the entire cannabis trade, the UK prefers to hand this golden egg to criminals. Thus such revenue streams disappear, never to benefit British society while simultaneously, we feed the black market in a never ending viscous circle.

As the law stands on narcotic legislation, a drug is to be criminalised if it poses a direct risk to society and the individual. Taking this into account, cannabis cannot possibly constitute an equal risk to society or the individual as that of alcohol. Alcohol kills more people in the UK than any other illegal drug put together. It places an immeasurable stress on the NHS, results in open violence in our streets and homes, is the cause of much misery and crime and addicts the user relatively easily. Yet it is legal, despite the law. As Cannabis does none of the above, in fact it promotes a more harmonious way of life, why is the government telling society that the only choice for rest and relaxation is a drug more dangerous than the alternative? Why are we forced into drinking as the only legal means of getting high? As an adult, one should be able to have a choice in what they wish to indulge in, in terms of rest and relaxation substances. It is simply unethical and unjust to state that alcohol is a more acceptable drug than cannabis.

Our prisons are over crowded forcing the government to lessen the deterrent effect of prison in general and allowing some violent offenders to serve less time or not go in to prison at all. The effect of legalisation in terms of lessening the prison population would be significant. Indeed, current prisoners incarcerated for cultivation or possession could be viewed as "prisoners of conscience" as their crime hurts nobody and therefore is a victimless crime. The police would also benefit by being able to divert their resources to serious crime instead. It is no secret that the arrest of a cannabis user is an easy way to artificially raise crime statistics in the UK. It is morally and ethically wrong to criminalise a person for choosing to relax by using cannabis. Other than this one grey area, the user is statistically a perfectly law abiding, tax paying and upstanding citizen. It is unjust in the extreme to criminalise the adult individual and force them in to the shadows of a society that they fully contribute to and do no harm to what so ever. Such a move as legalisation would reflect favourably on our society by emancipating millions of people to live life in the open as legitimate citizens, beneficial to society.

The medical use of cannabis is well documented and successfully launched in several states in the USA as well as in other European countries. Cannabis has substantial medical qualities and eases the life of millions for a multitude of different illnesses. Why is it that the government insists that our society base itself solely on pharmaceutical drugs when they cause such terrible side effects? There is, as millions will concur, a far safer, 100% natural and more enjoyable alternative. Cannabis is cheaper to produce and more effective at easing the ailments of the sick user. Now, we all know that smoking is bad for you, yet there is still no argument that therefore, cannabis is bad for you as it can be consumed orally or by means of a vaporizer with no medical consequences. Again, it is unjust, unsympathetic, unethical and immoral to deprive the sick of a drug that is proven to be of such medicinal value. As for the argument of cannabis and schizophrenia, well that is simply nonsense. Scientific research has proven a 2% risk of permanent mental dis-function in regular users. Therefore, such risks are insignificant when balanced against the risks associated with alcohol. Are we really such a society that would prefer to criminalise the sick instead of help them by any means possible? I refuse to think so and live in hope that our collective humanity and decency will eventually make it’s way to the parliamentary table.

Taking our current economic crisis into account, has the time not finally arrived when necessity dictates that cannabis is legalised and regulated through proper medical channels and taxed? Britain could help to solve her debt crisis almost over night; massively increased tax revenue, an explosion of new small to medium businesses, increased tourism, decreased prison population, freed up police force, the advancement of British medical science and an increase of GDP within the UK Hemp industry. Currently 100% of all this cash goes straight into the hands of the black market, benefiting nobody but the criminal and that is, frankly, a senseless waist of revenue. There are currently 6 million adult cannabis user’s in the UK and 11 million casual adult users. Being government statistics, one can assume a much higher real usage throughout Britain. To deny the country such a massive instant revenue windfall in a time of such austerity is madness. The maths is not difficult, legalisation makes rational sense. Is it not time for the UK to collectively wake up to the reality of the situation and consider another far more reasonable, rational and ethical approach to managing the issue of social drug use?

We could liberate millions while simultaneously improving our economy and society. Instead of being seen as an evil psychotic menace perhaps cannabis will one day be seen as our saving grace. At the same time society will see that adults are able to self regulate and children will lose interest due to the lifting of the magnetic effect of a teenager and an illegal substance mixed with greater regulation and a reduction in the black market. Britain would follow Holland in years to come whereby they would have among the lowest population of drug abusers in the world.

I hope that I have been able to convince you of the merits of cannabis legalisation. In my opinion, it is a simple, rational and logical argument for the social equality of millions of our citizens. It is the just and correct thing to do in a modern and apparently open society.

The right to regulated (Uncontaminated) cannabis

While many in the mainland UK enjoy a good supply of cannabis, albeit an illegal one less fortunate individuals in more cut off areas of UK e.g. Northern Ireland are left with the dregs. 

This includes various forms of tainted cannabis/ marijuana. Grass or weed can be sprayed with many materials to add weight before being bulk sold to a large scale dealer. The materials that have been identified so far include Fibre Glass, Sand, Lead Scrapings, Sulphur. The list goes on. Within cannabis resin any number of things can be found with the common theme being if it can be melted and mixed with cannabis it will do. Dog excrement, records, plastics and car tyre traces have all been discovered in resin. The ratio to cannabis / plastic while I dont know for certain from recent samples of resin in the area it is not good. 

But from a governmental standpoint on the drugs act, attempting to prevent us from buying marijuana legally has caused masses of people to smoke a lot more than just a plant. 

If a brewery was tainting its bear and someone got sick there would be an uproar but thousands of people are paying criminals for marijuana contaminated with harmful substances.

Why is this idea important?

While many in the mainland UK enjoy a good supply of cannabis, albeit an illegal one less fortunate individuals in more cut off areas of UK e.g. Northern Ireland are left with the dregs. 

This includes various forms of tainted cannabis/ marijuana. Grass or weed can be sprayed with many materials to add weight before being bulk sold to a large scale dealer. The materials that have been identified so far include Fibre Glass, Sand, Lead Scrapings, Sulphur. The list goes on. Within cannabis resin any number of things can be found with the common theme being if it can be melted and mixed with cannabis it will do. Dog excrement, records, plastics and car tyre traces have all been discovered in resin. The ratio to cannabis / plastic while I dont know for certain from recent samples of resin in the area it is not good. 

But from a governmental standpoint on the drugs act, attempting to prevent us from buying marijuana legally has caused masses of people to smoke a lot more than just a plant. 

If a brewery was tainting its bear and someone got sick there would be an uproar but thousands of people are paying criminals for marijuana contaminated with harmful substances.

Decriminalise Cannabis along the same lines as the Netherlands

I think we should look towards legalising cannabis in the UK, and stop penalising people that want to smoke it in their own home.

15 million people smoke it in the UK, it has less harmful affects or problems than alcohol, and the current legislation is keeping the supply within street gangs which leads to further problems such as the promotion of Class A drugs, weapons and a whole other murky world that the vast majority of users would not want to be a part of.

People have lived a long, enjoyable life using cannabis and it has been known to treast such as combating nausea from chemotherapy, lowering eye pressure in patients with glaucoma, treating AIDS-related wasting syndrome in order to stimulate appetite  and to a lesser degree to combat pain and muscle spasms in patients with diseases such as multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and Huntingtonís disease.

 

Cannabis has been around since the beginning of time, has been used as a remedy for many ailments, and its fibres can also be used to produce a number of different products. 

The UK should begin to reduce its deficit by introducing cannabis coffeshops such as the style in Holland.  With 15 million people using cannabis, we should seriously consider all the benefits to this.

 

 

 

Why is this idea important?

I think we should look towards legalising cannabis in the UK, and stop penalising people that want to smoke it in their own home.

15 million people smoke it in the UK, it has less harmful affects or problems than alcohol, and the current legislation is keeping the supply within street gangs which leads to further problems such as the promotion of Class A drugs, weapons and a whole other murky world that the vast majority of users would not want to be a part of.

People have lived a long, enjoyable life using cannabis and it has been known to treast such as combating nausea from chemotherapy, lowering eye pressure in patients with glaucoma, treating AIDS-related wasting syndrome in order to stimulate appetite  and to a lesser degree to combat pain and muscle spasms in patients with diseases such as multiple sclerosis, epilepsy and Huntingtonís disease.

 

Cannabis has been around since the beginning of time, has been used as a remedy for many ailments, and its fibres can also be used to produce a number of different products. 

The UK should begin to reduce its deficit by introducing cannabis coffeshops such as the style in Holland.  With 15 million people using cannabis, we should seriously consider all the benefits to this.

 

 

 

Legalise it!

I believe that Cannabis should either be legalised or decriminalised as the benefits to our health, society and world far out way the negative factors, which in comparison to a lot of other legal drugs (including our much loved alcohol) does significantly and almost minimal harm to the user and those around them. 

In America we're already seeing states taking the initiative to legalise Marijuana, at least for medical purposes, so why do we not see the same type of progressive thinking here? If Cannabis is so deadly, so harmful to our mental health, then where's the abundance of evidence to prove so? Cannabis isn't a new thing. In fact, it's cultivation and use dates back 10,000 years – a figure in which many historians agree to be accurate – so if anything negative was going to show up, it would've already done so by now. 

This isn't radical thinking: it's called being progressive. We all want to live in a fairer, greener world, and with the help of Cannabis and Hemp, we're able to do so. It's time to do the research, educate the public and stop the ignorance.

Why is this idea important?

I believe that Cannabis should either be legalised or decriminalised as the benefits to our health, society and world far out way the negative factors, which in comparison to a lot of other legal drugs (including our much loved alcohol) does significantly and almost minimal harm to the user and those around them. 

In America we're already seeing states taking the initiative to legalise Marijuana, at least for medical purposes, so why do we not see the same type of progressive thinking here? If Cannabis is so deadly, so harmful to our mental health, then where's the abundance of evidence to prove so? Cannabis isn't a new thing. In fact, it's cultivation and use dates back 10,000 years – a figure in which many historians agree to be accurate – so if anything negative was going to show up, it would've already done so by now. 

This isn't radical thinking: it's called being progressive. We all want to live in a fairer, greener world, and with the help of Cannabis and Hemp, we're able to do so. It's time to do the research, educate the public and stop the ignorance.

Legalise Cannabis cultivation for Medical/Personal use & introduce a growing Lisence, similar to a fishing lisence

I will keep my idea simple, as all the other messages/ideas, have pointed out the obvious points to semi-legalising the natural drug that is "cannabis" :

 

1.WHY SHOULD THE UK GOVERNMENT REVOLT THE LAW & ALLOW US TO GROW CANNABIS AT HOME

 

The FACT is thousands of people in the UK are already growing Cannabis for their own use, some for personal use/pleasure, others for medical help / health benefits. The Hydroponic & Seed company's are popping up all over the place at the moment, and this is helping with our economy. The problem is, and really think about this…. IT IS ILLEGAL in the UK TO GROW A SEED! , yes a seed, that mother nature put on this earth for us all to enjoy the fruits.  This its self is so WRONG!. but i have not come on here to grumble and moan, so i will get to my idea!…

2.  MY SUGGESTION TO OUR GOVERNMENT

What i suggest, is we relax the law on cultivation of cannabis, and allow a person, to rightly grow up to a certain amount of plants say(4 to 8) for our own use. To regulate this, and generate some income to the government at the same time, I suggest we incorporate a Liscence sceme, where if you wanted to grow cannabis in your own home, you would have to purchase, this liscence or apply for this  licence as you would a firearm.

This could then be regulated with spot visits, by the police or an agency that is put into place, similar / on the same lines as the environment agency and fishing liscening scheme. to ensure people are not growing over the limit(s).

 

3. WHY THIS WOULD WORK?

I Believe this would work, as the government could regulate, the people that are growing cannabis, just as they do with people that own firearms. 

Most people who are growing at the moment, are otherwise law-abiding citizens, and enjoy the pleasures of growing a plant from seed, just as you would growing tomatoes or chilli's, and enjoying the health benefits / calming / pleasure from thier hard work :-). The problem at the moment is this is illegal, and they could face upto 14 years in Prison! yes sad but true, prison for growing a seed?.

I should state at this point, I know way condone organised criminals growing 100's / 1000's of plants for financial gain, The laws should stick, or be upped greatly for criminals involved in the commercial cultivation of cannabis. This brings me to my next pointer:

 

3. IF THE UK GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING?

I strongly believe that cannabis smoking is on the rise, this means, that thier is a huge demand for the drug, which in turn is increasing the organised criminals to produce more of the drug, and sell it on our streets for extortionate prices. Often cut with dangerous particles like glass, to make it weigh more, increasing the criminals UN TAXED profits.  This will only get worse! unless the government step in, with a system to allow users to produce or buy  thier own supply, or have designated outlets to buy it, like in other countries i.e Holland. I wont go into this, as its already been more than cover's in other topics.

 

5.CONCLUSION

 

I think the PRO's far way the cons of legalising cannabis under a liscenced scheme for personal / medical growers. This would free up resources, police and courts,  and generate some income to the government to help with our national deficit / debt. Slow down the criminals / drug dealers dramaticly, as the smoker could grow his own, without having to come in contact with the dealers / organised thugs!. saftley in thier own home/greenhouse. We should be looking forward and ahead, not back and behind, lets be honest here, cannabis has NEVER EVER! killed anybody… and i think its MEDICAL uses need to be looked into very very carefully, this is an amazing plant that mother nature has given us.

ABOUT ME

My personal story is i use cannabis for my health with anxiety / panic attacks / depression, and started using the drug after a breakdown, it has helped me a lot, more than any anti-depressents could ever do! to the fact that i no longer suffer like i did for years. and I am now back in work, and leading a normal life, I only smoke once a week believe it or not 🙂 thats all i need to make me feel able to face the week ahead with a smile. 

I am not highly educated, so i appoligise now for my poor wording, and awful spelling lol…

 

Thanks for taking the time reading this, 

if you have anything to add please do

 

 

Why is this idea important?

I will keep my idea simple, as all the other messages/ideas, have pointed out the obvious points to semi-legalising the natural drug that is "cannabis" :

 

1.WHY SHOULD THE UK GOVERNMENT REVOLT THE LAW & ALLOW US TO GROW CANNABIS AT HOME

 

The FACT is thousands of people in the UK are already growing Cannabis for their own use, some for personal use/pleasure, others for medical help / health benefits. The Hydroponic & Seed company's are popping up all over the place at the moment, and this is helping with our economy. The problem is, and really think about this…. IT IS ILLEGAL in the UK TO GROW A SEED! , yes a seed, that mother nature put on this earth for us all to enjoy the fruits.  This its self is so WRONG!. but i have not come on here to grumble and moan, so i will get to my idea!…

2.  MY SUGGESTION TO OUR GOVERNMENT

What i suggest, is we relax the law on cultivation of cannabis, and allow a person, to rightly grow up to a certain amount of plants say(4 to 8) for our own use. To regulate this, and generate some income to the government at the same time, I suggest we incorporate a Liscence sceme, where if you wanted to grow cannabis in your own home, you would have to purchase, this liscence or apply for this  licence as you would a firearm.

This could then be regulated with spot visits, by the police or an agency that is put into place, similar / on the same lines as the environment agency and fishing liscening scheme. to ensure people are not growing over the limit(s).

 

3. WHY THIS WOULD WORK?

I Believe this would work, as the government could regulate, the people that are growing cannabis, just as they do with people that own firearms. 

Most people who are growing at the moment, are otherwise law-abiding citizens, and enjoy the pleasures of growing a plant from seed, just as you would growing tomatoes or chilli's, and enjoying the health benefits / calming / pleasure from thier hard work :-). The problem at the moment is this is illegal, and they could face upto 14 years in Prison! yes sad but true, prison for growing a seed?.

I should state at this point, I know way condone organised criminals growing 100's / 1000's of plants for financial gain, The laws should stick, or be upped greatly for criminals involved in the commercial cultivation of cannabis. This brings me to my next pointer:

 

3. IF THE UK GOVERNMENT DOES NOTHING?

I strongly believe that cannabis smoking is on the rise, this means, that thier is a huge demand for the drug, which in turn is increasing the organised criminals to produce more of the drug, and sell it on our streets for extortionate prices. Often cut with dangerous particles like glass, to make it weigh more, increasing the criminals UN TAXED profits.  This will only get worse! unless the government step in, with a system to allow users to produce or buy  thier own supply, or have designated outlets to buy it, like in other countries i.e Holland. I wont go into this, as its already been more than cover's in other topics.

 

5.CONCLUSION

 

I think the PRO's far way the cons of legalising cannabis under a liscenced scheme for personal / medical growers. This would free up resources, police and courts,  and generate some income to the government to help with our national deficit / debt. Slow down the criminals / drug dealers dramaticly, as the smoker could grow his own, without having to come in contact with the dealers / organised thugs!. saftley in thier own home/greenhouse. We should be looking forward and ahead, not back and behind, lets be honest here, cannabis has NEVER EVER! killed anybody… and i think its MEDICAL uses need to be looked into very very carefully, this is an amazing plant that mother nature has given us.

ABOUT ME

My personal story is i use cannabis for my health with anxiety / panic attacks / depression, and started using the drug after a breakdown, it has helped me a lot, more than any anti-depressents could ever do! to the fact that i no longer suffer like i did for years. and I am now back in work, and leading a normal life, I only smoke once a week believe it or not 🙂 thats all i need to make me feel able to face the week ahead with a smile. 

I am not highly educated, so i appoligise now for my poor wording, and awful spelling lol…

 

Thanks for taking the time reading this, 

if you have anything to add please do

 

 

Cannabis Cures Cancer, Healthier Than Drinking Tea!

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.
The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.
Most Americans don't know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.
The ominous part is that this isn't the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice — lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.
The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out — unsuccessfully — to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation … Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma … We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.
"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible." Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."
Guzman provided the title of the work — "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute — and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.
The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" — two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study — in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:
"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again Œdraw back the veil‚ over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."
News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Why is this idea important?

The term medical marijuana took on dramatic new meaning in February, 2000 when researchers in Madrid announced they had destroyed incurable brain tumors in rats by injecting them with THC, the active ingredient in cannabis.
The Madrid study marks only the second time that THC has been administered to tumor-bearing animals; the first was a Virginia investigation 26 years ago. In both studies, the THC shrank or destroyed tumors in a majority of the test subjects.
Most Americans don't know anything about the Madrid discovery. Virtually no major U.S. newspapers carried the story, which ran only once on the AP and UPI news wires, on Feb. 29, 2000.
The ominous part is that this isn't the first time scientists have discovered that THC shrinks tumors. In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice — lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.
The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out — unsuccessfully — to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

The Madrid researchers reported in the March issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC. "All the rats left untreated uniformly died 12-18 days after glioma (brain cancer) cell inoculation … Cannabinoid (THC)-treated rats survived significantly longer than control rats. THC administration was ineffective in three rats, which died by days 16-18. Nine of the THC-treated rats surpassed the time of death of untreated rats, and survived up to 19-35 days. Moreover, the tumor was completely eradicated in three of the treated rats." The rats treated with Win-55,212-2 showed similar results.

The Spanish researchers, led by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University, also irrigated healthy rats' brains with large doses of THC for seven days, to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects. They found none.

"Careful MRI analysis of all those tumor-free rats showed no sign of damage related to necrosis, edema, infection or trauma … We also examined other potential side effects of cannabinoid administration. In both tumor-free and tumor-bearing rats, cannabinoid administration induced no substantial change in behavioral parameters such as motor coordination or physical activity. Food and water intake as well as body weight gain were unaffected during and after cannabinoid delivery. Likewise, the general hematological profiles of cannabinoid-treated rats were normal. Thus, neither biochemical parameters nor markers of tissue damage changed substantially during the 7-day delivery period or for at least 2 months after cannabinoid treatment ended."

Guzman's investigation is the only time since the 1974 Virginia study that THC has been administered to live tumor-bearing animals. (The Spanish researchers cite a 1998 study in which cannabinoids inhibited breast cancer cell proliferation, but that was a "petri dish" experiment that didn't involve live subjects.)

In an email interview for this story, the Madrid researcher said he had heard of the Virginia study, but had never been able to locate literature on it. Hence, the Nature Medicine article characterizes the new study as the first on tumor-laden animals and doesn't cite the 1974 Virginia investigation.
"I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by these people, but it has proven impossible." Guzman said.

In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, "We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared."
Guzman provided the title of the work — "Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids," an article in a 1975 Journal of the National Cancer Institute — and this writer obtained a copy at the University of California medical school library in Davis and faxed it to Madrid.
The summary of the Virginia study begins, "Lewis lung adenocarcinoma growth was retarded by the oral administration of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabinol (CBN)" — two types of cannabinoids, a family of active components in marijuana. "Mice treated for 20 consecutive days with THC and CBN had reduced primary tumor size."

The 1975 journal article doesn't mention breast cancer tumors, which featured in the only newspaper story ever to appear about the 1974 study — in the Local section of the Washington Post on August 18, 1974. Under the headline, "Cancer Curb Is Studied," it read in part:
"The active chemical agent in marijuana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice and may also suppress the immunity reaction that causes rejection of organ transplants, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered." The researchers "found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
Guzman, writing from Madrid, was eloquent in his response after this writer faxed him the clipping from the Washington Post of a quarter century ago. In translation, he wrote:

"It is extremely interesting to me, the hope that the project seemed to awaken at that moment, and the sad evolution of events during the years following the discovery, until now we once again Œdraw back the veil‚ over the anti-tumoral power of THC, twenty-five years later. Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration."
News coverage of the Madrid discovery has been virtually nonexistent in this country. The news broke quietly on Feb. 29, 2000 with a story that ran once on the UPI wire about the Nature Medicine article. This writer stumbled on it through a link that appeared briefly on the Drudge Report web page. The New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times all ignored the story, even though its newsworthiness is indisputable: a benign substance occurring in nature destroys deadly brain tumors.

Legalisation of Class C and some Class B drugs

My idea is that by legalising substances commonly used for personal use, such as cannabis, it will have a positive effect on all communities.

Drug abuse in its current form is a massive problem. It costs the taxpayer an almost incomprehensible amount of money. Such important institutions like the NHS are being infiltrated by constant drug-related injuries, illnesses and crimes.

Due to the normal, quite severe state opposition to drugs, users and "dealers" have turned to shockingly horrific ways to traffic drugs around our community.

I propose that if certain drugs of Class B and C nature are legalised, not only will communities feel less ill-at-ease with the state, but the freedom that ensues in such moderation will actually make the whole process of politics and state-public relations much more friendly and considered.

Why is this idea important?

My idea is that by legalising substances commonly used for personal use, such as cannabis, it will have a positive effect on all communities.

Drug abuse in its current form is a massive problem. It costs the taxpayer an almost incomprehensible amount of money. Such important institutions like the NHS are being infiltrated by constant drug-related injuries, illnesses and crimes.

Due to the normal, quite severe state opposition to drugs, users and "dealers" have turned to shockingly horrific ways to traffic drugs around our community.

I propose that if certain drugs of Class B and C nature are legalised, not only will communities feel less ill-at-ease with the state, but the freedom that ensues in such moderation will actually make the whole process of politics and state-public relations much more friendly and considered.

Thoughts

You mention the fact that cannabis is illegal over here therefore aren't able to analyse the effect and user groups. 

Is there a way we are able to work together with Amsterdam Government to look at the effects cannabis has to user groups over there. 

 

Theoretically if we legalised cannabis in coffee shops and certain registered premises then wed possibly attract more tourism as that is one of Amsterdam's main attraction for tourists. 

Opens lots of doors and questions. 

Why is this idea important?

You mention the fact that cannabis is illegal over here therefore aren't able to analyse the effect and user groups. 

Is there a way we are able to work together with Amsterdam Government to look at the effects cannabis has to user groups over there. 

 

Theoretically if we legalised cannabis in coffee shops and certain registered premises then wed possibly attract more tourism as that is one of Amsterdam's main attraction for tourists. 

Opens lots of doors and questions. 

Turn millions of “criminals” back into civilians.

Millions of UK residents, hard working, tax paying, moral people are currently criminalised because of their choice of recreational drug.

Many Brits drink alcohol, many drink it to excess, only to end up in trouble through their foolish drunked actions, or addicted.

It perplexes me that these "drunks" are perfectly legal to wander our streets causing trouble, starting fights, damaging property and costing the Country millions of pounds every year.

When millions of us have to hide in our homes to smoke a little cannabis is completely unacceptable. Cannabis smokers are generally non-violent, cause absolutely no harm to society as a whole, have no detrimental effects on those around them, and enjoy their choice of recreational drug often as a hobby / lifestyle.

It's completely alien to me that you are allowed to go out binge drinking, using a legal drug which is highly addictive and damaging while if you choose to use a less addictive, far less damaging and FAR FAR FAR less socially damaging recreational drug you are classed as a criminal.

This must change before i personally have a shred of respect for the law in this country.

Why is this idea important?

Millions of UK residents, hard working, tax paying, moral people are currently criminalised because of their choice of recreational drug.

Many Brits drink alcohol, many drink it to excess, only to end up in trouble through their foolish drunked actions, or addicted.

It perplexes me that these "drunks" are perfectly legal to wander our streets causing trouble, starting fights, damaging property and costing the Country millions of pounds every year.

When millions of us have to hide in our homes to smoke a little cannabis is completely unacceptable. Cannabis smokers are generally non-violent, cause absolutely no harm to society as a whole, have no detrimental effects on those around them, and enjoy their choice of recreational drug often as a hobby / lifestyle.

It's completely alien to me that you are allowed to go out binge drinking, using a legal drug which is highly addictive and damaging while if you choose to use a less addictive, far less damaging and FAR FAR FAR less socially damaging recreational drug you are classed as a criminal.

This must change before i personally have a shred of respect for the law in this country.