Don Brash: "We should decriminalise marijuana"

[oneofsix]

Oddly enough, if it were an approved medication it would completely invalidate work place (or road side) drug testing. I wonder if that's part of the objection to it from the authorities

Not completely, with existing prescription drugs they still have to be with in the terms of the prescription, this would be the same. Other countries are already dealing with this issue.

[Clockwork]

Extracting the effective ingredient by a phamaceutical company and developing a painkiller from it is very different from smoking the weed for a high. It would do nothing at all to affect the legislation against Cannabis use.

Not completely, with existing prescription drugs they still have to be with in the terms of the prescription, this would be the same. Other countries are already dealing with this issue.

As far as I'm aware THC is the active ingredient but remains detectable long after its narcotic effects have worn off.

Do other countries deal with it?

[superman]

Oddly enough, if it were an approved medication it would completely invalidate work place (or road side) drug testing. I wonder if that's part of the objection to it from the authorities

I don't think that would be the case. Many medications have strict conditions that you don't drive after consumption.

[Clockwork]

I don't think that would be the case. Many medications have strict conditions that you don't drive after consumption.

Yeah, but for 3 months after consumption?

[superman]

Yeah, but for 3 months after consumption?

Aye?

"While under the influence"

[imdying]

I'm not sure where the problem is with people just wanting to enjoy getting high?

I like the tipsy feeling that comes with the odd drink, surely it would be hypocritical of me to begrudge pot smokers their chosen pleasure?

[Clockwork]

.... and is ignoring the "advice" of a pharmaceutical company or doctor an offense?


Driving under the influence is.... but as I understand it being able to detect it and being under the influence of it is not necessarily the same thing is it?

[mashman]

Why are you on the dole?

I'm not mate... I was playing along with husaberg...

[Edbear]

As far as I'm aware THC is the active ingredient but remains detectable long after its narcotic effects have worn off.

Do other countries deal with it?

I don't think that would be the case. Many medications have strict conditions that you don't drive after consumption.

Perhaps this is one of the issues facing drug companies as side effects or potential side effects are always listed and we should be aware of them and make choices according to what we think about the particular drug we are offered.

It is our responsibility to educate ourselves, make our choices and then be accountable for them. We each have the freedom to choose for ourselves what we do and say, but we also have the corresponding responsibilty to make unselfish choices that may adversely affect thos around us and to accept any consequences either good or bad, for the choices we do make.

Like it or not, we live in a mixed society and short of living alone on an island and providing everything for ourselves, we must accept the social responsibility that goes along with it.

[Edbear]

.... and is ignoring the "advice" of a pharmaceutical company or doctor an offense?


Driving under the influence is.... but as I understand it being able to detect it and being under the influence of it is not necessarily the same thing is it?

That's one of the difficulties with pulling people over and testing them. There aren't any clear giudlines as to how much of what drug, either illegal or legal, affects each person. The Alcohol legislation is an arbitrary average but it can be measured by testing equipment.

I'm not mate... I was playing along with husaberg...

Fairynuff!

[superman]

Perhaps this is one of the issues facing drug companies as side effects or potential side effects are always listed and we should be aware of them and make choices according to what we think about the particular drug we are offered.

It is our responsibility to educate ourselves, make our choices and then be accountable for them. We each have the freedom to choose for ourselves what we do and say, but we also have the corresponding responsibilty to make unselfish choices that may adversely affect thos around us and to accept any consequences either good or bad, for the choices we do make.

Like it or not, we live in a mixed society and short of living alone on an island and providing everything for ourselves, we must accept the social responsibility that goes along with it.

Exactly!

We shouldn't let the government stifle our freedom for personal choices that do not affect anyone but ourselves. Victimless crimes should not have enforcement. If we do cause problems for others we must face the consequences as you say.

[Edbear]

Oh, PS. You have said you've been looking for work that would allow you to care for your daughter and that may not be easy to find. You are not what I'd class as a bludger.

Bludgers are those who always seem to find an excuse as to why they can't find a job.

I think I misread your post. It is your daughter trying to find a job, not you?

I assume she's been as flexible as possible in the jobs she applies for? It's not so much a matter of what job you take on, it's more that if you are working at whatever you can find. Being in the workplace has a tendency to produce opportunites, and some that may not be obvious at first.

Sometimes lowering your standards can lead to improving your job in a short time even if you do something you may not like at first. Many people who started at McD's on low wages are now running their own businesses, either a franchise or something completely different. It's more about being inside rather than outside the workforce. I started off pumpimg gas.

[scissorhands]

Is it a sin before god to judge another person unfairly?

Would an angry god do something about that?

or would a loving god show mercy and understanding?

judge not others, least you be judged....

[superman]

is it a sin before god to judge another person unfairly?

Would an angry god do something about that?

Or would a loving god show mercy and understanding?

Judge not others, least you be judged....

dammit why!?!?!?!?!

[Edbear]

Exactly!

We shouldn't let the government stifle our freedom for personal choices that do not affect anyone but ourselves. Victimless crimes should not have enforcement. If we do cause problems for others we must face the consequences as you say.

Therein lies one of the issues. As with so many "personal" choices, claims we are "not hurting anyone else" are in fact untrue. What we do and say, always affects someone else for either good or bad, and we have to decide how selfish we wish to be in pursuing our desires.

Very few, it seems are willing to show restraint for the common good, rather insisting on "their rights" to do as they please and everyone else can suck eggs.

Whether one agrees or not, the law is the law as decided in a democtratic society and we are, as citizens of said society, bound by them. Rebell and you get punished.