Posted on 08/06/2006 6:04:24 AM PDT by Wolfie
Reefer is Worth Getting Mad About
Vienna -- Supporters of the legalization of cannabis would have us believe that it is a gentle, harmless substance that gives you little more than a sense of mellow euphoria.
Sellers of the world's most popular illicit drug know better. Trawl through websites offering cannabis seeds for sale and you will find brand names such as Armageddon, AK-47 and White Widow. "This will put you in pieces, then reduce you to rubble -- maybe quicksand if you go too far," one seller boasts. This is much closer to the truth.
In Canada, as in most parts of the world, cannabis is by far the drug of choice. An estimated 4 per cent of the world's adult population -- that's about 162 million people -- consume cannabis at least once a year, more than all other illicit drugs combined.
Does that matter? I firmly believe it does, because the cannabis now in circulation (like Canada's BC Bud) is many times more powerful than the weed that today's aging baby boomers smoked in college. The characteristics of cannabis are no longer that different from those of other plant-based drugs, such as cocaine and heroin.
Evidence of the damage to mental health caused by cannabis use -- from loss of concentration to paranoia, aggressiveness and outright psychosis -- is mounting and cannot be ignored. Emergency room admissions involving cannabis are rising, as is demand for rehabilitation treatment. These health problems are increasingly being seen in young people.
North America is the world's largest cannabis market and most of its cannabis is homegrown. The U.S. market alone has been valued at more than $10-billion. As Canadians are starting to discover, a market that size inevitably attracts organized crime. So cannabis is a security threat as well as a health risk.
Amid all the libertarian talk about the right of the individual to engage in dangerous practices, provided no one else gets hurt, certain key facts are easily forgotten.
Firstly, cannabis is a dangerous drug, not just to the individuals who use it. People who drive under the influence of cannabis put others at risk. Would even the most ardent supporter of legalization want to fly in an aircraft whose pilot used cannabis?
Secondly, drug control works. More than a century of universally accepted restrictions on heroin and cocaine have prevented what would otherwise have been a pandemic. Global levels of drug addiction -- think of the opium dens of the 19th century -- have dropped dramatically in the past 100 years. In the past 10 years or so, they have remained stable.
Cannabis is the weakest link in the international effort to contain the global drugs problem. In theory, it's a controlled substance. In practice, it's running rampant. It grows under the most varied conditions in many countries, a high-yielding plant that can be grown indoors. This makes supply control difficult.
But we can tackle demand, particularly among the young. That need not mean sending them to jail. Young people caught in possession of cannabis could be treated in much the same way as those arrested for drunk driving: fined, required to attend classes on the dangers of drug use and threatened with loss of their driving licence for repeat offences. Prison would be a last resort. Schools and universities should apply zero tolerance.
National policies on cannabis vary and sometimes change from one year to the next. The experience of countries that were more tolerant of cannabis use is ambiguous and not persuasive. The distinction between "soft" and "hard" drugs is, at best, artificial, especially with such a damaging psycho-active substance as modern-day cannabis. Even some advocates of cannabis as a "soft" drug are now reconsidering as they observe the devastating health consequences of abuse.
Canada was a pioneer in introducing systematic anti-smoking policies, which are now being copied around the world. Their success demonstrates that preventive measures can help to change attitudes. Similar policies are needed to prevent cannabis use getting completely out of control.
Let's draw the right conclusions. Cannabis is dangerous. We ignore it at our peril.
Antonio Maria Costa is executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
lol
Speaking as an aging baby boomer, I never thought I'd be nostalgic over a $20 baggie of Mexican.
Who wrote this piece - Count Floyd?
SCTV Flashback - "Monster Chiller Horror Theater".
"Scary, huh, kids?"
Yep. All the advertising hype is gospel, and all the cannabis out there is hydroponically grown superweed. Got it.
This starting statement is utter bullshit. I didn't bother to read any further.
Antonio Maria Costa? Gender identity crisis.
It's goofy stoner ad copy. As an aside, the "AK-47" this U.N. stooge mentions is not, as one would think, named after the weapon, but for the flowering time (47 days give or take) and heritage (Alaskan). No rubble, no quicksand. The fact that the seed banks make up names for their stock is not surprising. The fact that they hype it with ad-copy isn't either.
Still, you should see him on the back 9 at Augusta.
Okay... Wait, what did you ask?
> The distinction between "soft" and "hard" drugs is, at best, artificial, especially with such a damaging psycho-active substance as modern-day cannabis. Even some advocates of cannabis as a "soft" drug are now reconsidering as they observe the devastating health consequences of abuse.
Why is it that fanatic drug haters always ridicule themselves by showing an absolute lack of knowledge about the subject? Not that I recommend getting high on dutch killer everyday for everyone, but devastating health consequences...do these people want to be taken serious?
Yeah, right.
More than a century of universally accepted restrictions on heroin and cocaine have prevented what would otherwise have been a pandemic.
< whiney voice > "It would be so much worse if we didn't have 'drug control'." < off whiney >
This is the same "It woulda been worse.." excuse liberals use for everything they try to fix. If demonrats get control and gas goes to six bucks...
(I should have added, "Then click on 'Add to My Cart'", but that probably goes without saying.)
Sheer idiocy. Just for starters, nobody has ever fatally overdosed on even the strongest marijuana.
North America is the world's largest cannabis market and most of its cannabis is homegrown. The U.S. market alone has been valued at more than $10-billion. As Canadians are starting to discover, a market that size inevitably attracts organized crime. So cannabis is a security threat as well as a health risk.
No, LAWS AGAINST cannabis are a security threat. When the drug alcohol was illegal, that market attracted organized crime.
People who drive under the influence of cannabis put others at risk.
People who drive under the influence of alcohol put others at risk ... is that sufficient reason to ban that drug?
Global levels of drug addiction -- think of the opium dens of the 19th century -- have dropped dramatically in the past 100 years.
Actually, Ken H has shown that drug addiction is higher in war-on-drug meccas like Singapore than it is in the USA.
With the name Antonio Maria, I doubt they'd let him within 100' of Augusta National.
It is a security threat and a magnet to crime precisely because it is illegal. Duh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.