Cannabis legalisation

**jrandom** · 5th April 2007, 14:09

u4ea's recent thread bemoaning the current situation vis-a-vis medicinal use of cannabis got me thinking.

With elections approaching, it's time to consider what policies are important to us, what works well as it stands, and what needs to be fixed.

The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party (ALCP) is a political party focused on achieving legislation to legalise cannabis use and production in New Zealand.

The question behind my question is: Would you use your party vote to throw your weight behind a single-issue party, confident in the knowledge that if they exceed the parliamentary entry threshhold, Governmental adoption of their primary legislative policy in exchange for their support of a major party becomes a highly likely outcome?

In other words, would you be happy to leave it to the Silent Majority (tm) to decide between the not-too-dissimilar socioeconomic approaches of Labour and National, and focus instead on supporting a single policy that was important to you or someone you cared about?

This could, of course, apply equally to the Greens' ideas on conservation and sustainability, but that's not what's on my mind right now.

**jrandom** · 5th April 2007, 15:04

I'm disappointed, folks.

39 thread views, and only 8 responses to the poll?

It's impossible not to hold a position congruent with one of my poll options. Come on, guys. Feel the love, share the data...

**Disco Dan** · 5th April 2007, 15:17

It has it's place in society, in medicine and also in mental health.

I have seen this drug have negative effects on people, alter their mental health and cause the person to withdraw from society. Lost their job, and the respect of peers.

I have seen a person who is normally very reserved and timid, take the drug in moderation and started to explore his personality more than ever before. This person is now the life of most events and no longer uses the drug.

I have used this drug before, and as with everything in life - if it is abused then that is when the problems begin. I only "agree with" drugs that occur naturally: marijuana, mushrooms, peyote cactus etc I have not and will not ever go near a drug that has been 'manufactured'. As human beings our bodies are simply not designed to be exposed to that sort of stimulus in our brains. The results of this 'unatural stimulus' is usually always headline news... rape, murder, armed robbery etc etc.. all fuelled by 'manufactured' drugs.

Yes, it is mostly an 'experimental' stage/phase that most young adults go through, but in correct dosages the medical benifits far outway any psycoactive drawbacks.

**Street Gerbil** · 5th April 2007, 15:19

My brain pays for my petrol. No chance in hell I'll consider to try anything potentially harmful for its functioning. If you want to fsck up yours, that's your own problem as long as you stay off the road and don't threaten to kill me or anybody else. I say, other than that, the only law governing drug use should be Darwin's.

**The_Dover** · 5th April 2007, 15:24

skin up bro!!

**onearmedbandit** · 5th April 2007, 15:25

I voted for the second option. I have no shame in admitting I smoke marijuana (like some people expect I should) but the laws controlling it don`t affect me on a daily basis enough to vote for a single issue party. I get my supply from a good friend, it lasts me long enough to not be a financial burden (I spend less on pot in a week then drinkers do in a night), we don`t associate with `gangs` or other heavies as he grows his own.

**spookytooth** · 5th April 2007, 15:30

no option for who gives a fuck ?

**The_Dover** · 5th April 2007, 15:31

Originally Posted by spookytooth

no option for who gives a fuck ?

yeah, it's called don't vote and fuck off and read something else cocksmoker

**jrandom** · 5th April 2007, 15:32

Originally Posted by spookytooth

no option for who gives a fuck ?

Sure there is.

It's called "don't bother reading the thread".

**Cajun** · 5th April 2007, 15:33

Don't use, never really done interest me,

But saying that alot of good money is wasted trying to prevent it, so maybe not legalise it but recrimilse it, for people having amounts small enough for personal use, or even go as far and put a tax on like ciggs(dont see that happening in a nana labour state)

**spookytooth** · 5th April 2007, 15:40

had to read it to see if i gave a fuck or not

**The_Dover** · 5th April 2007, 15:41

Originally Posted by spookytooth

had to read it to see if i gave a fuck or not

and when you read it?

**SPman** · 5th April 2007, 15:50

Originally Posted by The_Dover

and when you read it?

see post #7

**Drum** · 5th April 2007, 16:11

Option No.2.

Toker, but there are issues more important to me than legalising weed, like income tax splitting, raising tax thresholds etc.

**MisterD** · 5th April 2007, 16:23

Originally Posted by Street Gerbil

My brain pays for my petrol. No chance in hell I'll consider to try anything potentially harmful for its functioning.

I take it you don't drink either then, SG?

I don't partake of cannabis anymore, but only because I saw the smoking aspect as a physical health risk which had an adverse effect on my enjoyment of, and ability to perform at MTBing and rugby...dose control if you're eating the stuff is just too damn hard.

As a benevolent dictator, I'd legalise it, tax it and break the link to organised (or disorganised) crime...but it's not high enough on my priority list to spend my whole party vote on.