h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I fear that this topic has been hacked to death, but I'd like to add my general views anyway (they're not attacking the article).

Firstly I think it has been a stupid idea of the legalising cannabis lobby to latch onto its possible medical uses. There is a legitimate campaign here, but the majority of the people I hear are using the argument as a reason why cannabis should be made legal. If cannabis is shown to have medical use on MS sufferers, then it will be made available on prescription in some form which will probably remove the high and wont be smoked. It's not going to open the gates for everyone to start bunning up.

I support the reclasification of cannabis and moves to decriminalise its use, but I think it is a bad idea to legalise the drug. Whilst people shouldn't be criminally punished for using the drug, it shouldn't be made completely open. Legalising would mean drug companies actively selling and marketing the drug, encouraging people to use it (and though it has no major health issues, it does make people more stupid and less aware whilst on it). I also don't think it should be smoked in public places, for the same reason that ciggarettes shouldn't be, as it can be unpleasant for others in the area.

So the declassification move I think is a good one (albeit one which was pretty much in force anyway, most police officers have long given up criminally prosecuting those caught with small amounts).

Is 'making people stupid and less aware' a valid reason for keeping something illegal, Frankie? What else would you ban on that basis? The tabloid press? Soap operas? Boy & girl bands? I dislike all of these things, but I wouldn't wish to deny them to those who enjoy them (well, actually, I might make an exception for S Club 7 ).

Alcohol makes people stupid and less aware, and it makes you fat (I should know ). It is also much more likely to predispose people towards violence than is cannabis. People get glassed in pubs; I don't think that they often get joints stubbed out in their faces in Dutch coffee shops.

But despite all the manifest problems associated with and , I wouldn't support the introduction of prohibition; and if you wouldn't either, then I would argue that it's inconsistent to support a ban on what is an arguably less harmful means of temporarily relieving the pain of life's stresses.

I agree that when compared, the laws on alcohol and cannabis are inconsistant. Alcohol is indeed a terrible drug, and even worse (as it really has no positive effects) is tobbacco. If either was invented today it would surely be illegal. The fact is though that they both have been around for sometime and are to some extent embedded within popular culture. This has to be taken into account.

I believe that society has a responsibility to look after its citizens. We are not always able to make the best decisions about ourselves and should be supported and looked after by our society. Activities such as drug taking which harm health should be discouraged. They should not, however, be punished. I believe legalisation, especially in the hands of capitilist drug companies, would be too much like encouragement.

In an ideal society, ie. one in which society is based upon community rather than an authoratitive state government, we should be discouraged from doing anti-social and harmful activities, but allowed to have small pleasures in moderation. Heavy drinking should be discouraged, but light drinking be acceptable. Tobbaco should be strongly discouraged. Like these and any other drugs, cannabis should be treated with the same logic, weighing plus points against negative ones, so that it is acceptable in moderation and in private, but discouraged from being relied upon and heavily used. Basically, drugs should be treated with common sense, with people given appropiate advice and encouraged to be responsible.

In the present situation, under the current systems of society, I think it would do more harm than good to legalise cannabis and hand over control to the drug manufactureres.

This might seem a bit hypocritical as I do sometimes smoke cannabis and my mum has MS, but I think it is logical.

The factor that neither of you is taking into account is that the 'forbidden' nature of cannabis smoking makes it appealing to a lot of people who would otherwise not be at all interested. Just look what happened to the consumption of alcohol in the USA during the prohibition!
Legalise it and many young people will lose all interest in cannabis.

One thing that I hope we can all agree on is that cannabis isn't going to go away. Millions have been spent on the War On Drugs, and still those who want it can easily get it - as you, Frankie, know very well. The cannabis industry is here to stay. The question is not one of whether or not there is going to be a trade in cannabis: it's merely one of who is going to supply the demand.

Frankie, you're understandably uneasy about the prospect of capitalist drug corporations controlling the trade. I actually suspect that if cannabis were to be legalised, the cannabis industry would come to be controlled partly by drug companies (for the drug's medical applications) and partly by tobacco companies, who would surely be quick to create a pre-rolled spliff market.

There are very good reasons to be unhappy about the corporations taking control of cannabis. The tobacco industry represents capitalism at its most appalling: companies cynically manufacturing a product that they know perfectly well is addictive and lethal, and attempting to suppress the damning evidence of the product's dangers.

However, the alternative is to leave the industry where it is now: in the hands of criminals. If cannabis were marketed legally, at least the quality of the product would be controlled by law. You'd know what you were buying. Not only that, but it would be taxed, so there would be some benefit to the general public in terms of public funds being raised, rather than all the profits going to criminals, as is the case at present.

Nitpicker, I agree with you. Cannabis currently has the thrill of the forbidden attached to it. If it were legalised and became just another leisure option, it would lose that air of rebel cool. And what is perhaps more important is that its users would no longer have to go to underground sources who, in many cases, also deal in far more dangerous substances.

Good arguments there, and there is something to be said about cannibis acting as a fund-raising tool for other criminal activities. However, I still think it should not be turned into a free market (but then, I disagree with the free market anyway). I think the best thing in the current situation to decriminalise cannabis and remove the criminal supply routes would some kind of system whereby it could be supplied through controlled sources but not commercialised. I don't like the idea of big billboards and television adverts strongly encouraging cannabis use (as happened for tobbacco). Like tobbaco, cannabis should never be sold as a profit-making industry.

In theory, I could certainly go for that. Trouble is that our 'wonderful' free-market system doesn't have many mechanisms for getting goods to people without a profit being involved.

Yeah...

Some people have talked about state-run clinics and things, but I don't really know much about the idea...

*ahem*

well, at the moment a lot of cannabis is grown under lights in britain, and then passed from person to person. Not all cannabis dealers deal other drugs but many do. The 'gateway' drug argument seems bogus to me, like suggesting that one who sips hooch as a child will be necking vodka by the bottle as a teenager and a miserable alcoholic in thier twenties. (though thats not an uncommon lifestory) Leah Bett's dad said that he'd never met a heroin addicted who hadn't smoked a spliff, but thats one of those 'cows have four legs, four legs means cow, sheep has 4 legs therefore sheep is cow, in that its stupid, wrong and missing the point.

The point is people - some or most of them - show a desire to want to get off thier faces, reach states of assisted relaxation from waaaaay back in history. Its a symptom of society how many people choose to to get monged for how much of the time. I see no harm in using some drugs some of the time, others choose to be straight edge and I think we all agree that hardcore junkies, alcoholics etc need help not criminialisation.

So I say legalise all drugs, and make reality better.



pj

Yeah I agree pretty much. There's a good book (sorry I'm in work mode) about the uses of drugs to relieve people from life throughout history (I think it's called 'the history of intoxication').

We do need to be aware of the problems drugs can cause, and give help to those who suffer, but we should also be allowed to smoke a joint or two now and then if we so choose.

BTW - what's the best way to smoke cannabis without tobbaco?

I haven't tried this technique in many years, but a lot of people swear by bongs.

A lot of people talk a lot of nonsense and then pass out by bongs, too.

I seem to remember something about 'hot knives' but don't ask me for precise details

A pint glass, a long needle and a match also spring to mind, but not recommended as the 'hit' is pretty immediate and intense.

I wonder if I could get away with writing an entry on 'How to Make Space Cake!


shazz

I should think so, Shazz, as long as a disclaimer was attached. After all, we've already had an Edited Entry on joint-rolling technique: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A591284 . And I can't think of anyone better qualified than yourself to write such an Entry!

What I want to know is: what's with the '' in the last posting? Quite a intriguing juxtaposition, I thought...

I have just started sub-editing duties and I also owe another uni write-up on card games, but I suppose I could blacken my name and reputation for ever by writing one at some time!

With regards to the ; all will be revealed when the Dutch Meet photo's are available


shazz

- Yay!