Drugs
Posted by Mark Oaten, MP for Winchester, at 16:30, Mon 2 November 2009:
Hi everyone,
So I thought a relevant topic for our next discussion could be…drugs policy. Specifically cannabis.
To keep the discussion focused I’d like to know what you think about the classification of cannabis rather than whether the Home Secretary was right or not to sack our drugs adviser. So, do you think the current cannabis classification is working? Should it be classified a B or C grade drug, or even legalised?
Any views on that would be very interesting to hear.
Thanks
Mark
Comments
Commenting on this message is now disabled.
Posted by Richard McDonald Woods, 16:56, Mon 2 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
It seems that cannabis is less dangerous to health than either tobacco or alcohol. I would therefore think that its classification is a political decision and not a medical one. I would support its being made legal if the medical profession has no objections.
Posted by David J Buttle, 17:40, Mon 2 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
We should be led by the Medical Profession in their advice , but I would NOT want it to be made Legal.
Like most Peoples perseption of GM's . Drugs are drugs and should not be freely available.
Posted by David Dingley, 17:58, Mon 2 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
We need rational decision making about drug (and other) policy - let's have a full and open discussion of the evidence and, if it is as it seems, that cannabis is less harmful and risky than many other activities and drugs - legalise it. Apart from other things, this would send a message that we are governed rationally and thoughtfully rather than by knee jerk emotional responses and prejudice.
Posted by Teilo Elliot-Smith, 18:26, Mon 2 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
It seems to me the discussion about cannabis is wider than just the immediate symptoms which do/don't accompany it. Let's not forget that whichever its' classification, it still remains illegal ultimately. I hope this fact is not misunderstood by those who believe it to be harmless and seek its' declassification in the hope that they may use it recreationally without breaking the law 'too much'. The effects of cannabis are often downplayed, yet can be wide ranging and dangerous for others - when driving under influence, for instance. Long-term and persistent use is harmful to the individual too. However, let's not divorce the issue from a wider appreciation that a laissez-faire attitude to drugs at this level would inevitably lead some on a dangerous road to harder abuse. Considering the wider message (not just the medical perspective) is where the politicisation comes in .
Posted by karen anderson, 19:46, Mon 2 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
I don't like to condone any drug use, leastways one often associated with smoking. However, I also believe that it may, in general, be less harmful than alcohol. As governments are more than happy to scoop revenue from the latter it does seem highly hypocritical to make such a wide distinction in law between the two.
Posted by Andrew Pritchard, 08:59, Tue 3 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
I don't think the classification will make the slightest bit of difference. People will smoke cannabis whether it's illegal or not - so I say legalise it. At least that way the government will be able to get the tax from it, and the users will know the product is pure. Then use the tax money to crack down on the people peddling 'harder' drugs.
Posted by Sian Jethwa, Rhiannon Jethwa, Barbara Hopkins, 10:36, Tue 3 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
I think that by keeping this drug illegal it has made it a tool for rebellion. At least if it was legallised then there could be procedures put in place to try and stop the use of 'skunk' and the other types of cannabis that have been proven to cause mental illness etc, however the normal weed is not responsible for these side affects. I know many people who smoke this drug and have no problems with it. There are a lot of things in this world which are addictive...but that is down to the individual. I think its about time people were given the freedom to take responsibilty for their own lives and the government stopped trying to control every aspect of our lives.
Posted by Dave Craven, 13:52, Tue 3 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
I think I must start taking drugs in order to overcome a massive urge to do the decent thing on Nov 5th and relieve us all of the pocket liners in the Houses of Parliament.
Posted by Nigel R May, 20:03, Tue 3 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
I do not take any illegal drugs. However, if I were so inclined to do so, I would most certainly be guided by the advice of the medical specialists rather than any politician without any medical background. Those that do take drugs do so at their own risk even if taking it is against Medical advice or opinion. After all, why employ consultants to advise you and then go totally against their opinion?
Posted by Mark Oaten, 13:29, Tue 17 November 2009: (Is this post abusive?) #
Hi,
Thanks to everyone who posted here and wrote to me seperately on the issue. It is a topical debate and very thought provoking.
One thing is for sure no matter where you stand on the legalising issue - everyone agress that the government should take the advice of scientists and not politicise the issue - something i definetely agree with.
Mark