Cannabis referendum.

[Katman]

Several factors spring to mind:

1. Cost (black market product may be relatively cheaper if "tax free")

2. Local Availability (depends whether legal product may be purchased only from a "bricks and mortar" outlet). How many resellers will wish to establish premises ?

3. Variation in Product Content (depends upon variation in product potency e.g. THC, or in other non-THC components). Wide range of strains having varying THC and CBD %, as well as other components (such as GHB and turpenes).

Buyers may not be able to purchase a "product" meeting their particular wants from a local outlet (or even a web-based outlet, if that is permitted).

If any of those options where a real issue why wouldn't the person just grow their own?

You can't get much cheaper than that.

(By the way, is your reference to GHB another oversight or do you know of some connection between GHB and cannabis?)

[MD]

Good to see some calm and considered posts and so far no mud slinging. It's a difficult topic. I'm on the fence. I sure used it from high school onwards as a youth but I stuck to the rule that it was a socialising tool, not a daily must have and never something you would take on your own. Friday and weekends , at parties, at a the pub it seemed no different when socialising than sharing a drink of Cola or beer.

For me I simply grew out of it in my late 30s I suppose. But I do know of a couple of people, old friends, who I would describe as addicted to dope since high school age. They didn't 'grow out of it'. It's intrenched, no different than a regular food source, and not wanting to be insulting they are not the bright intelligent spark I remember. It does eventually slow the brain or dumb down the heavy user to a point where their company is, well a tad lacking.

One concern is what will the current criminal supply element- gangs, do if they find their Buyers are going elsewhere. Get nasty, intimidate people to buy from them. Or infiltrate the legal market, or worse increase their efforts to push P instead.

For now I will probably vote yes because it's the lesser evil compared to booze and casual dope users, like I was, shouldn't find themselves with criminal convictions. Booze causes the most harm in our society and that's legal. Cannabis smokers from my experience don't get nasty, don't get violent, don't often get a sense of false bravado that leads to reckless dangerous behaviour.

[Katman]

For me I simply grew out of it in my late 30s I suppose. But I do know of a couple of people, old friends, who I would describe as addicted to dope since high school age. They didn't 'grow out of it'. It's intrenched, no different than a regular food source, and not wanting to be insulting they are not the bright intelligent spark I remember. It does eventually slow the brain or dumb down the heavy user to a point where their company is, well a tad lacking.

I've used cannabis for coming up to 40 years now.

I don't indulge every day though - it's more of a 'when the mood strikes' thing.

Yes, cannabis can be psychologically addictive to some people - but not to anywhere near the same degree as alcohol.

[Viking01]

If any of those options where a real issue why wouldn't the person just grow their own?

You can't get much cheaper than that.

(By the way, is your reference to GHB another oversight or do you know of some connection between GHB and cannabis?)

GHB: Understand that it may also be present in very small concentrations. Error in earlier post yesterday was writing GHB when I meant CBD.

Agree your point on cost, but an intending user may still have some “concerns” on points 2 and 3.

Availability
While it may grow like a “weed”, do all intending users have a “green thumb”, or want the bother of manufacture (harvesting and drying)?

Will they always have continuity of supply (i.e. a stash of product ready for their consumption when wanted) ?

Users may want some control over access. Easier to "lock up" supply of dry product (i.e. want it to be available for adults in their household, but not children).

Might attract some unwanted attention from “black market” operators (if demand for their product falls off).

Product Content

Still to be determined if higher THC % strains will be permitted. If not legal, then the “black market” may be the only source for high THC % products.

[Katman]

GHB: Understand that it may also be present in very small concentrations.

Really? I've googled 'GHB in cannabis' and can't find anything that supports that suggestion.

Availability
While it may grow like a “weed”, do all intending users have a “green thumb”, or want the bother of manufacture (harvesting and drying)?


Will they always have continuity of supply (i.e. a stash of product ready for their consumption when wanted) ?

Users may want some control over access. Easier to "lock up" supply of dry product (i.e. want it to be available for adults in their household, but not children).

Might attract some unwanted attention from “black market” operators (if demand for their product falls off).

A household would be permitted to grow up to 4 plants. Four plants would provide plenty for most cannabis users. Grown outdoors you'd have to wait 6 months for your crop but indoors under grow lamps cuts the time down to a fraction of that.

Product Content

Still to be determined if higher THC % strains will be permitted. If not legal, then the “black market” may be the only source for high THC % products.

There are already higher THC % seeds out there. If people want to grow their own higher THC strains they can do so without any difficulty.

[Viking01]

Really? I've googled 'GHB in cannabis' and can't find anything that supports that suggestion.

You're correct (again). I should have said CBG.

I'm having a bad week. Trying to do several things at once, and too many similar initials. I'll shut up now .... 8-)

[Katman]

You're correct (again). I should have said CBG.

I'm having a bad week. Trying to do several things at once, and too many similar initials. I'll shut up now .... 8-)

Do you have reason to believe that CBG is particularly bad in cannabis?

Because this link suggests that it might well have medical benefits.

https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis...bg-cannabinoid

[Viking01]

Do you have reason to believe that CBG is particularly bad in cannabis?

Because this link suggests that it might well have medical benefits.

https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis...bg-cannabinoid

Think the main concern is with THC. And that (as the link suggests) some components - other than just CBD - do have beneficial (or moderating) properties.
Reluctant to say any more.

I'm more interested in hearing what other people (users of the product) have to say on the legislation.

[Edit]

https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis...nnabis-effects

[BMWST?]

i dont know enough about the actual product ,benefits etc of the product.As some one above has already mentioned what are the uninteded consequences going to be.?You are disrupting a big black market.There will be consequences.

[MaxPenguin]

I'm moderately opposed. This based on my occasional involvement with the stuff for a few years about 30 years ago. I found that the results were inconsistant. Sometimes I got really fucked up and other times it was like ... mehh. If it were able to be produced in a commercial setting where results had to be consistent or at least measurable and reported (like alcohol content in booze) and there was no home grown because face it ... home grown will still be sold. ... then I'd probably be more comfortable with it being legal. I'll vote against but not by much ... and I won't lose sleep if it becomes legal as long as there are good guidelines around it.

There ya go Katman. I'm sure you wanted one negative guy for you to jump on and ridicule. Go for it!

Yet you can purchase many different alcoholic drinks ranging from 1/2% to 50plus % and people drink them and get well and truly fucked up. So consistency to me seems a tad irrelevant.

[Katman]

Yet you can purchase many different alcoholic drinks ranging from 1/2% to 50plus % and people drink them and get well and truly fucked up. So consistency to me seems a tad irrelevant.

And many of those alcoholic drinks are being manufactured (and marketed) in such a manner that they can't really be seen as anything much other than an attempt to entice younger drinkers.

[mashman]

I'm moderately opposed. This based on my occasional involvement with the stuff for a few years about 30 years ago. I found that the results were inconsistant. Sometimes I got really fucked up and other times it was like ... mehh. If it were able to be produced in a commercial setting where results had to be consistent or at least measurable and reported (like alcohol content in booze) and there was no home grown because face it ... home grown will still be sold. ... then I'd probably be more comfortable with it being legal. I'll vote against but not by much ... and I won't lose sleep if it becomes legal as long as there are good guidelines around it.

There ya go Katman. I'm sure you wanted one negative guy for you to jump on and ridicule. Go for it!

With regards to consistency. Did you know what strain(s) you were smoking each time? With 4 different variants of plant and hundreds of strains to choose from, each with their own characteristics, I'd be surprised if consistency was really an issue, especially when you consider that homegrown tomatoes taste much better than commercial grown tomatoes for some reason(s). It's a plant that is just as consistent as any other grown thing when it's treated right and grown with love. State of mind, amount smoked, current tolerance and a few other things also come into play with regards to how stoned one is likely to become.

More comfortable?

[Katman]

i dont know enough about the actual product ,benefits etc of the product.As some one above has already mentioned what are the uninteded consequences going to be.?You are disrupting a big black market.There will be consequences.

You can't cook an omelette without breaking some eggs.

[FJRider]

On the Principle - 100% support it, long overdue IMO.

Not quite. 100% of those that smoke it support the changes.

On the implementation - I've not seen any discussion about decriminalizing people:

Possession for your own use will be legal in small amounts.

There will be set limits of what maximum amount you may have in your possession ... for your "Own use".

Smoking it in the privacy of your home will legal. In Public places it will not.

Growing it for supply will be illegal.

Riding or driving under the influence of it will be illegal.

Any past convictions for possession will be removed from your record. But only for amounts OVER the new maximum amounts for personal use.

If your record has convictions for any drug offenses that are still illegal ... (Possession for supply, Growing for supply, driving under the influence of it ..etc) they will NOT be removed from your record.

For some people who's living is made by growing and selling Weed, their immediate network is comprised of Fellow Criminals - it seems foolish to me to expect them to suddenly become law-abiding citizens.

And when the bottom drops out of their products value ... and the penalties increase for the unlicensed Growing/selling ... so will their market.

And they'll find/make other products to sell.

I'd like to see some plans/thought by the Government as to how we look at moving those people from their current state of existence outside of the law, to law abiding Tax Payers.

Perhaps a life INSIDE might be more to their liking ...

Some seem to have a high expectation of what the law changes will mean.

The drug laws are being relaxed ... NOT removed.

[FJRider]

i dont know enough about the actual product ,benefits etc of the product.As some one above has already mentioned what are the uninteded consequences going to be.?You are disrupting a big black market.There will be consequences.

One door closes ... another door opens. Other markets (and products) will be found.

Change ... but the same. Just like every other business.