Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Medical Cannabis


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#16 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6191 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:04 AM

I think we could see chaos on the roads overnight with the end of prohibition.


what are you talking about man?

you think prohibition is actually stopping people taking drugs?

what are people just sitting their waiting for the law to change so they can go out and get high?

I didn't realise uk420 was home to so many barely repressed Mail readers, Jesus
www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."

#17 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10842 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:11 AM


would object to its production being limited to licensed growers. It would be hard to sustain draconian legislation against personal growers if licensed producers were widespread.


who said anything about preventing personal growers?

the Californian propositions all allow for personal grows of several m2

Italy has already decriminalised personal growing -

any sane proposal for reform is going to have to allow personal growing - with agreed limits (defined by something like numbers of plants, yield, or area used etc.)

likewise, any sane post-prohibition scenario is going to have punish any large scale personal production beyond agreed limits (if not then personal growers would be being given a commercial advantage over legit businesses)


Entirely agreed on the pressures on governments as they gradually give way to legalisation. My point is that there are pressures here that are very difficult for governments to control. How do you in practice put a limit on the amount grown? And more crucially for me - what could a government do in the face of a benign but widespread personal growing campaign aimed at driving down the price to the point at which it escaped the economy altogether. This is such a unique crop in terms of the ease of production compared top the power of the effect. What can a modern economy do with a product of huge value but very low cost? Alcohol control is probably the nearest point of comparison but whilst homebrew is simple enough you can't make homebrew beer proliferate anywhere near as easily as you can fill your back garden with dope plants, a pinch from every flower of which is enough to give you an excellent evening.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#18 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:11 AM

what you need now is a campaign to grow as much as possible as widely as possible



On it mate! :yep:

And yes, there will always be an underground.

Edited by Randalizer, 06 August 2011 - 09:12 AM.


#19 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10842 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:14 AM


I think we could see chaos on the roads overnight with the end of prohibition.


what are you talking about man?

you think prohibition is actually stopping people taking drugs?

what are people just sitting their waiting for the law to change so they can go out and get high?

I didn't realise uk420 was home to so many barely repressed Mail readers, Jesus


Of course, but legalisation would change cannabis production radically - you could get your spade out and grow sacks and sacks of it - 99% of the current cost of production is in systems to help you hide it.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#20 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:18 AM

Wow wow back up fella. Daily What? Don't swear at me like that :) What I mean is there would be a novelty factor in the early days of post prohibition and I can see a lot of people that have never used it using potent cannabis for the first time. We all know what that can be like.

I'm not saying there are hoards of people waiting for the day, but I think the uptake of people who had never considered using it would have a go. Yes I do think there are millions of people who don't have any experience of it because of it's status. My mum for example hates it, she's a nurse and just cannot be convinced so much so she thinks I've stopped but she thinks it's ok to use prescribed opiates. It's the DM readers I'm thinking about. Gerald and Hilda having a go cos it's available. Times a few thousand.

#21 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:21 AM

99% of the current cost of production is in systems to help you hide it.



uh, come again? 99% of the cost is giving my girls a good home. And even if legalised, I would still want to be stealthy due to thieves.

#22 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10842 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:21 AM

Wow wow back up fella. Daily What? Don't swear at me like that :) What I mean is there would be a novelty factor in the early days of post prohibition and I can see a lot of people that have never used it using potent cannabis for the first time. We all know what that can be like.

I'm not saying there are hoards of people waiting for the day, but I think the uptake of people who had never considered using it would have a go. Yes I do think there are millions of people who don't have any experience of it because of it's status. My mum for example hates it, she's a nurse and just cannot be convinced so much so she thinks I've stopped but she thinks it's ok to use prescribed opiates. It's the DM readers I'm thinking about. Gerald and Hilda having a go cos it's available. Times a few thousand.


Gerald would have his spade out and be off down the allotments in no time. Plant some Blues, let the males and females all get it on, collect the seeds and next year you'd have enough to get the whole of Didcot stoned for a month.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#23 Ishmael

Ishmael

    thanks for the avatar Deez

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10842 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:23 AM


99% of the current cost of production is in systems to help you hide it.



uh, come again? 99% of the cost is giving my girls a good home. And even if legalised, I would still want to be stealthy due to thieves.


There'll be no point nicking it if there's some in every hedgerow.

"I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me."

Isaac Newton


#24 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:24 AM

And whilst that may seem like an off the wall statement I have wracked and wracked my brains over this I still come back to this thought.

#25 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:27 AM



99% of the current cost of production is in systems to help you hide it.



uh, come again? 99% of the cost is giving my girls a good home. And even if legalised, I would still want to be stealthy due to thieves.


There'll be no point nicking it if there's some in every hedgerow.


I think there would be a difference in quality and it would be seasonal like conkers and mushrooms. Loads of chavs trespassing to get some smoke.

#26 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:29 AM

There'll be no point nicking it if there's some in every hedgerow.



Oh don't be so naive. You're much smarter than that. There will always be thieves.

#27 I_L_M_G

I_L_M_G

    I_Love_My_Grow

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1120 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:32 AM


Wow wow back up fella. Daily What? Don't swear at me like that :) What I mean is there would be a novelty factor in the early days of post prohibition and I can see a lot of people that have never used it using potent cannabis for the first time. We all know what that can be like.

I'm not saying there are hoards of people waiting for the day, but I think the uptake of people who had never considered using it would have a go. Yes I do think there are millions of people who don't have any experience of it because of it's status. My mum for example hates it, she's a nurse and just cannot be convinced so much so she thinks I've stopped but she thinks it's ok to use prescribed opiates. It's the DM readers I'm thinking about. Gerald and Hilda having a go cos it's available. Times a few thousand.


Gerald would have his spade out and be off down the allotments in no time. Plant some Blues, let the males and females all get it on, collect the seeds and next year you'd have enough to get the whole of Didcot stoned for a month.


Then he'd be on here asking loads of dumb assed questions like me!

I'm a bit scared of Rand too!

#28 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6191 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:36 AM

what could a government do in the face of a benign but widespread personal growing campaign aimed at driving down the price


ok let's contextualise this another way

if you go to Nepal, which is covered in wild dope, some of it notably potent, why does 10g of the best charas still sell to foreign visitors for between $20 - $50?

Entirely agreed on the pressures on governments as they gradually give way to legalisation.


you lost me there, where did I mention that?

My point is that there are pressures here that are very difficult for governments to control. How do you in practice put a limit on the amount grown?


that's the same problem as under prohibition, it's nothing new

how do you stop businesses fixing their accounts? how do you stop counterfeiters and tax evaders?

Of course, but legalisation would change cannabis production radically - you could get your spade out and grow sacks and sacks of it


legalisation is never going to mean you can grow as much pot as you want - legalisation just means bringing dope into a normal market system, with all of the same obligations and legal crap any normal business has

for that reason, as Randalizer says, there will always be an underground --- just as there will always be counterfeiters, and tax evaders

Edited by namkha, 06 August 2011 - 09:40 AM.

www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."

#29 Randalizer

Randalizer

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23738 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:43 AM

I'm a bit scared of Rand too!


Oh. I'm really a nice person! :yes: :dev: :angel_not:

#30 namkha

namkha

    Resin Coated

  • Lifetime Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6191 posts

Posted 06 August 2011 - 09:48 AM

What I mean is there would be a novelty factor in the early days of post prohibition and I can see a lot of people that have never used it using potent cannabis for the first time. .


actually a legal system is a much better context for people taking (government) messages about health and safety seriously

hence why tobacco smoking has seen across the board reductions over the past decades, unlike use of controlled ('illegal') drugs

the idea that once selling cannabis is licensed George and Hilda will get out their skulls and crash their car is bloody daft, sorry

you can be sure any pack of spliffs you could buy at a UK newsagent or offy would be covered in messages about dangers of driving, tar, cancer, mental health etc.

I didn't hear about the Netherlands being plagued by pile ups of respectable citizens when they decided to tolerate coffeeshops in the '70s

there may have been a very slight growth in use of cannabis in NL when the coffeeshops were introduced, but cannabis use was meanwhile exploding in countries like the US and UK at the time anyway

the fact is that ideas about respectability and status have a much more powerful influence on human behaviour than government laws

... speeding on the motorway etc. etc. etc.

Edited by namkha, 06 August 2011 - 09:52 AM.

www.therealseedcompany.com

"Look, we understood we couldn't make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue...that we couldn't resist it." - John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

"[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks" Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, "The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to."


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users