Dobbed in weed-growing parents

[jellywrestler]

After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes. After a drug dealer is arrested, however, neither the supply nor the demand for drugs is seriously changed.

that in itself is one of the dumbest comments i have ever heard, the two 'offences' couldn't be further apart in terms of motivation to commit and the number of rapists in any given time in a country our size compared with the number of people who sell drugs is a 'little' different too.
whoever wrote this needs to go to a retirement home or similar

[Edbear]

I would suggest that if you're really expecting any police officer on here to do anything other than tow the company line you're being extremely naive.

What I would like to ask of any of the police officers on here is what percentage of problems they face "on the front line" regarding alcohol abuse compared to cannabis use?

And I'd be interested to hear the answer of anyone here in the medical profession also.

I've never never known Scummy and RedMermaid to be anything but straight up and open.

[bogan]

So to sum up, the link is flawed in several areas and legalising the use of Cannabis would not change anything.

Thats a bit harsh, there is certainly some data missing to support their theories, which is not to say those theories are flawed. Unless you post other studies that show that to be the case.

The fact that I prefer to go by clinical test results and not anecdotal "evidence" by users in deciding whether I think Cannabis is harmless or not is my prerogative.

Which are?

Dude, you've got to start backing these claims up as you make them. You should realise by now your broad assertions without you backing them up are what a lot of people find annoying about your posts.

that in itself is one of the dumbest comments i have ever heard, the two 'offences' couldn't be further apart in terms of motivation to commit and the number of rapists in any given time in a country our size compared with the number of people who sell drugs is a 'little' different too.
whoever wrote this needs to go to a retirement home or similar

Isn't that all they were trying to say? That removing dealers from the system is not an effective solution like it is for rapists.

[Edbear]

Thats a bit harsh, there is certainly some data missing to support their theories, which is not to say those theories are flawed. Unless you post other studies that show that to be the case.

Which are?

Dude, you've got to start backing these claims up as you make them. You should realise by now your broad assertions without you backing them up are what a lot of people find annoying about your posts.

Isn't that all they were trying to say? That removing dealers from the system is not an effective solution like it is for rapists.

I specifically said the link is flawed in several areas and analysed those in my post. You would be better to address each point and say whether you agree or not. Be specific as I was.

I will find and post the clinical studies if you wish, but surely you and others here must have researched them for yourselves, you know, to make sure you have a balanced and realistic view? Oh, hang on...

The comparison with rapists is ridiculous for obvious reasons. Well, maybe not so obvious to some?

[Banditbandit]

[Katman]

The comparison with rapists is ridiculous for obvious reasons. Well, maybe not so obvious to some?

If viewed with an open mind the statement is quite valid.

All they're saying is that while there is no shortage of people prepared to step forward and become drug dealers, society hasn't sunk to the point where there's the same number of people prepared to become rapists.

If society is prepared to spend huge sums of money to protect itself from crime then it's far more sensible to spend that money on the more heinous crimes where any little gain is a gain nonetheless.

[Edbear]

If viewed with an open mind the statement is quite valid.

All they're saying is that while there is no shortage of people prepared to step forward and become drug dealers, society hasn't sunk to the point where there's the same number of people prepared to become rapists.

If society is prepared to spend huge sums of money to protect itself from crime then it's far more sensible to spend that money on the more heinous crimes where any little gain is a gain nonetheless.

The statement was that if you lock up a rapist there are fewer rapes but locking up a drug dealer makes no difference. Think about it.

[Madness]

These people have their reasons clearly laid out, and I would like to hear from our own law enforcement officers as to how they see it.

Good luck with that.

Let's look at the highlighted points. The opening sentence is the one I would like our Police to comment on, do they agree it is prohibition causing the issues around drug taking and its conequences? The officers in this link seem to think so, but what do our police experience on the front line?

So you're avoiding passing comment on the views on numerous law enforcement officers, Judges, etc shown on the linked site then?

Certainly the criminals supplying the drugs make a lot of money, but who forces the users to buy/take the drugs? Or do the users buy/take them on their own intitiative? Like cigarettes, do the tobacco companies hold a gun to the heads of addicts and force them to buy?

Nobody forces a Cannabis user to use Cannabis. It is done by choice as most users enjoy the many benefits the substance provides them whilst causing no harm to others around them.

"After a rapist is arrested, there are fewer rapes" Bollocks. There are fewer rapes than drug users getting stoned and causing issues, irrelevant to the discussion. Anyone following the news would see that.

The point being raised has flown over the top of your daft head like a low-flying Hercules.

Yes, prohibition does cost a lot and yes, drugs are cheaper, more potent and more widely used. Is it prohibition causing this, or are more people using drugs? Society in general is breaking down with big increases in a lot of negative activity these days. Not just drugs but also alcoholism, binge drinking, random violence, home invasions and gang wars.

Drugs are cheaper? Than what? An ounce of Cannabis sells for between $300 & $400 NZ, hardly what I'd call cheap. Did you actually have a point here or is it just waffle?

Alcohol is legal and "strictly controlled" by legislation. What makes you think legalising Cannabis will result in anything else? Yes, this site is about legalising, not decriminalising, and as you like to point out, there is a difference, how do you see this link?

How would the restrictions of use currently affecting alcohol being extended in some way towards cannabis use be a bad thing? Clearly it's being widely used already so bringing it out into the open must be a positive for society in general. The message around alcohol use is one of moderation, self-awareness and responsibility. The environment around Cannabis use is one of secrecy.

"We believe that sending parents to prison for non-violent personal drug use destroys families" Certainly doesn't help them, anyway. How many people here are imprisoned for non-violent, personal use?

In the U.S? Millions each year I'd hazard to guess.

"A regulated and controlled environment" has done nothing for alcohol abuse and the victimising of children, neither would it make a difference to drug use. It would not cost any less either.

I'd hate to live in New Zealand without the regulated and controlled environment around alcohol use. There is a long way to go before abuse towards children is eliminated but this issue is hardly solely to be blamed on alcohol.

I have said many times, that I have no issues with the potential benefits of Cannabis being researched and developed, even to the point that if it was available as a legal alternative painkiller and was more effective with less side effects than other drugs, I would be happy to use it. Of course that wouldn't suit the proponents here who simply want to smoke it and get high.

That is why I call them hypocrites, when they use arguments based on potential health benefits to support their vew. They are not interested in health benefits.

And I will call you a hypocrite for the reason that you spout on about "experts" dealing with the negative effects of Cannabis use having a greater understanding of the issue than the man in the street. You are pointed towards a site full of such "experts" that oppose your view and all you can do is state that it is flawed.

So to sum up, the link is flawed in several areas and legalising the use of Cannabis would not change anything. We already have a defacto decriminilising of personal use and few are given severe penalties for simply smoking a joint. Like the speed limit there is a tolerance towards minor offending. I think, from memory, there is already a type of such in Australia where instant fines are handed out rather than arresting and taking them to court? Correct me if I am wrong here. How many really think such would make any difference here?

Tell the 30-odd thousand Kiwis who recieved Cannabis convictions last year that we enjoy "defacto decriminalisation". This is bullshit.

The fact that I prefer to go by clinical test results and not anecdotal "evidence" by users in deciding whether I think Cannabis is harmless or not is my prerogative.

So you'll run with anecdotal evidence only when it suits you then?

So I don't support the decriminilising of Cannabis as it would not make any difference. I note that proponents of it do not use alcohol as an example of the benefits of such, either.

It would not make any difference to you, this is true. It's not about you though, is it Ed? It's about being fair to all Kiwis, some of whom prefer Cannabis over other legal substances. Many pro-Cannabis proponents will not use alcohol to support their argument because they do not like alcohol, it's effects and the resulting mess it leaves on our society. Using alcohol legislation in a Cannabis debate is all about showing the injustice and hypocrisy that exists under current laws.

If you want to smoke a joint in your own home and get high, it is not my problem any more than if you want to get drunk at home. Both are inherently harmful to a greater or lesser extent, backed up by clinical studies.

No, it's not your problem - nobody said it was. It does not affect you one iota but the Cannabis user is not thinking about the potential harm to their health when they consume it, they are thinking primarily about being convicted, penalised and ostracised by elements of our society. Wouldn't it be great if they could put all that to one side and start thinking of their health?

Thanks for taking the time Ed. It's a pity you didn't broaden your horizons as a result of doing so but hey, it was worth a shot.

[SMOKEU]

Don't expect any cops to come on here and give their honest opinion on cannabis harm (or lack thereof). They will all wank on about the same old government propaganda that they are expected to enforce without question.

[blue rider]

Don't expect any cops to come on here and give their honest opinion on cannabis harm (or lack thereof). They will all wank on about the same old government propaganda that they are expected to enforce without question.

It is what pays their bills. I expect no cop to protect and serve, only to enforce laws.....good people all of them

[Madness]

The statement was that if you lock up a rapist there are fewer rapes but locking up a drug dealer makes no difference. Think about it.

Makes perfect sense. Care to elaborate on why you disagree?

What happened in South Auckland when Malcolm Rewa was finally caught Ed?

[Edbear]

Good luck with that.

So you're avoiding passing comment on the views on numerous law enforcement officers, Judges, etc shown on the linked site then?

I specifically addressed their views point by point.

Nobody forces a Cannabis user to use Cannabis. It is done by choice as most users enjoy the many benefits the substance provides them whilst causing no harm to others around them.

Your point being? The LEAP claim it is the prohibition that is the problem

The point being raised has flown over the top of your daft head like a low-flying Hercules.

Yeah, whatever...

Drugs are cheaper? Than what? An ounce of Cannabis sells for between $300 & $400 NZ, hardly what I'd call cheap. Did you actually have a point here or is it just waffle?

They claim that prohibition has contributed to the issue.

How would the restrictions of use currently affecting alcohol being extended in some way towards cannabis use be a bad thing? Clearly it's being widely used already so bringing it out into the open must be a positive for society in general. The message around alcohol use is one of moderation, self-awareness and responsibility. The environment around Cannabis use is one of secrecy.

Neither problem is geting any better whatever the legislation.

In the U.S? Millions each year I'd hazard to guess.

I said here...

I'd hate to live in New Zealand without the regulated and controlled environment around alcohol use. There is a long way to go before abuse towards children is eliminated but this issue is hardly solely to be blamed on alcohol.

And I will call you a hypocrite for the reason that you spout on about "experts" dealing with the negative effects of Cannabis use having a greater understanding of the issue than the man in the street. You are pointed towards a site full of such "experts" that oppose your view and all you can do is state that it is flawed.

Bollocks again, I said and I repeat, I addressed the points one by one.

Tell the 30-odd thousand Kiwis who recieved Cannabis convictions last year that we enjoy "defacto decriminalisation". This is bullshit.

Missed the point again. (How unlike you..) How many of those 30,000 were merely smoking a joint at home in private?

So you'll run with anecdotal evidence only when it suits you then?

Huh?

It would not make any difference to you, this is true. It's not about you though, is it Ed? It's about being fair to all Kiwis, some of whom prefer Cannabis over other legal substances. Many pro-Cannabis proponents will not use alcohol to support their argument because they do not like alcohol, it's effects and the resulting mess it leaves on our society. Using alcohol legislation in a Cannabis debate is all about showing the injustice and hypocrisy that exists under current laws.

I wasn't arguiing about that, the point is whether the decriminalisation of Cannabis would make it better, it won't.IMHO...

No, it's not your problem - nobody said it was. It does not affect you one iota but the Cannabis user is not thinking about the potential harm to their health when they consume it, they are thinking primarily about being convicted, penalised and ostracised by elements of our society. Wouldn't it be great if they could put all that to one side and start thinking of their health?

Bollocks! A show of hands of users here who would stop using based on the health risks highlighted by anyone, medical or otherwise?

Thanks for taking the time Ed. It's a pity you didn't broaden your horizons as a result of doing so but hey, it was worth a shot.

I thought so, now if you could take of your prejudicial blindfold for just a minute....

[Banditbandit]

[blackdog]

[Madness]

I thought so, now if you could take of your prejudicial blindfold for just a minute....

That's fucking rich coming from you Ed. You don't just have the prejudicial blindfold, you've got the deluxe lycra body suit edition, complete with cape.

You haven't addressed anything at all in the link provided, just dismissed it and called for Scumdog to comment. Typical Ed fail but to expect anything more was blindly optomistic on my part I admit.

I take comfort in the fact that this issue has screened on local television twice in the past week and on both occasions the status-quo has been brought into serious question by both academics and politicians. The 7-Sharp poll ended last night with 68% of the vote supporting total legalisation of all drugs in new Zealand, something I don't necessarily agree with but it shows the swing in popular opinion towards common sense. There will always be the ignorant and bigoted in any discussion and Ed will always be at the forefront of such bigotry on KB.

Oh well, back to work.