Posted on 06/27/2006 9:09:47 AM PDT by Fractal Trader
THE drugs watchdog of the United Nations has rebuked the UK government's policy change on cannabis, saying it sent a confusing message to young people.
UN experts also warned that a major increase in the potency of cannabis means it now poses health risks similar to those of heroin.
The decision to reclassify cannabis as a Class C drug - made by the Home Secretary in 2004 - was implicitly criticised by Antonio Maria Costa, the executive director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, who warned of the growth in its use.
Cannabis had become more potent in the past few decades and governments that maintained inadequate policies got the "drug problem they deserve", Mr Costa said in the 2006 World Drug Report.
"Policy reversals leave young people confused as to just how dangerous cannabis is," he added. "
The cannabis pandemic, like other challenges to public health, requires consensus, a consistent commitment across the political spectrum and by society at large."
He warned governments against playing party politics with the classification of cannabis as its harmful effects were "no longer that different" to the damage caused by cocaine and heroin.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.scotsman.com ...
This information is antiquated. See the new information about marijuana and lung cancer - there's actually lower numbers than would be expected among pot smokers.
No, I have no musical talent at all.
She didn't either.
LOL!
"Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."...Harry Anslinger, Director, Federal Bureau of Narcotics
.
Just facts - no ego involved . . .
The "gateway effect" has been shown to be explainable by an underlying propensity to chemically alter one's mental state ... and the same sort of statistics that show a "gateway effect" for marijuana also show such an effect for alcohol and tobacco, two drugs you hypocritically refuse to support banning.
Correlation is not causation. It's just as much an explanation to say that people who are willing to break one law are likelier to be willing to break another ... or that people with violent personalities are likelier to seek mind-alteration.
• Young people who use marijuana weekly are nearly four times more likely than nonusers to engage in violence.37
See above.
• More than 41 percent of male arrestees in sampled U.S. cities tested positive for marijuana.38
Irrelevant to the claimed violence link, since many arrestees are arrested for nonviolent offenses (like, say, marijuana possession). And how many arrestees used the drug alcohol in the past 30 days (which is about how long the inert byproducts of marijuana use remain detectable in the body)?
Makes sense, so ban the pot and then work on the alcohol.
Sounds like you have a plan. :-)
Pot is already banned ... and it's YOUR arguments that logically imply the need to ban alcohol, so YOU need to work on it. You can start by stating right here that "I, A CA Guy, support a general ban on the gateway drugs alcohol and tobacco" ... unless you're a spineless hypocrite, of course.
I would say ban the excessive use right off
Not even close to the same thing. You're not a spineless hypocrite, are you?
The difference between pot and cigarettes or pot and alcohol is substantially different than the difference between killed by a gun or a butter knife. For one thing, nobody dies from THC overdoses. For another, a physically addictive drug like nicotine or alcohol makes those who don't get it suffer physically upon withdrawal. This is not true of potheads kicking the habit. While they might not WANT to kick the habit, it's as simple as putting down the spliff. Meanwhile, we sell more addictive drugs over the counter. It DOES matter, because government is hypocritically calling pot worse than drugs that are CERTAINLY far worse, denying people who could actually benefit from the drug an inexpensive method of pain and nausea relief, and denying Americans a cheaper, easier, less addictive high than alcohol or tobacco. Or did you want to federally ban those, too?
"Besides that, how do you know that it's not chemical? Isn't it possible that some people could become chemically addicted to THC?"
THC is not physically addictive. I know it's not possible because science has proven time and again it isn't. So it is not possible, no matter the question you pose. That your friends, ex-wife, etc. etc. are all lifelong potheads, well, I guess that means that you used to hang out with a bunch of losers 8), but it doesn't mean their addictions are physical. They just don't mind being losers because they're high all the time, I suppose.
"But it really doesn't matter to me because I think that people that take drugs are idiots."
So do I, but I don't recall the Constitution giving the federal government the power to ban idiocy. It's certainly no way for a conservative to get to small or efficient government. Especially since under that standard we'd have to arrest most of those running the country.
"If you're never done it, you should try to ride with a cop on a Saturday night. Just about all their calls are drug related."
As someone ELSE who has been on ridealongs, that 'drug related' charge wouldn't happen to include alcohol, would it? Because most of the 'drug related' folks I saw were drunk--carrying their alcohol, too. The ones I saw that were high and NOT drunk were almost certainly crackheads, doing something that certainly wasn't pot, because they were bouncing off the walls and didn't have the pot reek about them, but a different sort of reek.
Did she run off with a negro jazz musician?
Now - that's funny! I don't care who you are.
So - today's cannabis is more potent than that of the past?
In 1976 I had a friend that got a batch of some that was orange. I can't name a variety, but maybe Acapulco Gold? It was probably the most potent cannabis I ever smoked. I wish I had a batch of it right now.
That is my point, one is not toxic right away and can be used in moderation without toxicity (alcohol).
The other is instantly toxic (pot).
Not even close to the same thing, except that people who abuse alcohol are big problems like people who use pot (and often mix it).
What a stunning, brilliant argument. Full of logic, wit, and strength. You must be a Dartmouth man.
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.