There will always be the exemption to any rule. Its a sad fact of reality that a sizeable portion of any general populace are morons. It just appears to me that we always legislate for the lowest common denominator, rather than just applying common sense. Why carry on a spiralling arms race between law and criminals when you can just pull the rug from under them. You won't get rid of the criminals because they are just criminals and they will find other avenues to be what they are. I would also still advocate prohibition to anyone under the age of 25.
i do agree with the age restriction thing. i guess they would be the ones buying from the street corner tho. feck it i am voting for blob next time.
It's probably the people under the age of 25 who are most interested in dope, so if you raise the legal age too far, legalisation won't solve the problem. I got stoned the first time in California. I was nearly 19. The thing was, the legal drinking age there was (is?) 21, so the kids couldn't go to a bar and have a drink. So what did they all do? Smoke grass. That was the social thing in that age group. I strongly suspect that a lot fewer of them would have been smoking if they could just have gone to a bar to socialise.
Tax it low, cheap to grow = much cheaper than the current black market price. If large amounts are grown it will be cheaper to buy it that was than grow it at home and sell it without tax. This works for alcohol. Most people have the capacity to make it, but it won't be any cheaper than buying cheap (taxed) alcohol in tesco.
Actually, if you legalise it, I would suspect that you would have a flourishing local economy in cannabis. After all, I grow my own rosemary, thyme, parsley, chives, coriander etc. Putting a couple of cannabis plants in a pot wouldn't be very difficult. Given the amount of people out of work, I would imagine that there would be no shortage of local producers selling informally, as there already are no doubt. Maybe this would be a good thing, if it didn't criminalise them, but then like any good business, they'd do their best to expand production and their market. As I have said, I am just undecided, but I don't think that consumption should be a criminal offence. But then that's a bit woolly, isn't it? If it's OK to smoke it, why wouldn't it be to supply it? Maybe the solution is to legalise it with a limit on the THC content, and hugely increase punishments for product that exceeds this THC content. That might be the best of both worlds, as it would clearly make skunk illegal but the more harmless sorts legal.
Why tax it at all? Pot smokers already pay their taxes via other means, same as everyone else. Why should they be hammered with further (and probably very high) taxes ? Its the inflated price which attracts the criminals. Remove that and they'll no longer be interested. Of course they will then move on to some other criminal activity, but that's an entirely different issue. Neil Young - Homegrown - YouTube
Because it's your turn Us fag smokers (ex of this parish, by the way) have been paying for the country for fookin' yonks. 'Bout time some other mug stumped up.
I agree that it is not consistent to make it legal to own and consume weed but not legal to produce and sell it. That is a sort of political fudge and compromise contrived to get contentious legislation passed, not a desirable end point. Good point as regards the THC content. With other legal but controlled substances like alcoholic drinks and tobacco, the concentration level of the active ingredients is measured and controlled quite carefully. Cannabis would have to be the same, obviously. And the scope for introducing such controls is one of the justifications for legalisation.
It doesn't have to be smoked. Take the pure THC and make a drink with it or a tablet. Sell the tablets or the drinks through legitimate existing retail chains. Make the punishment for growing, selling and possessing it in plant form 25 years mandatory. You can't grow it at home, you can't sell it on the street. You certainly can't smoke it, but you can get high. After all, that's what you want isn't it? The ends is more important than the means?
25 years for putting a natural seed in a plant pot? Come on man! How could you square that with it being legal? You're not going to get 25 years for distilling your own hooch - and nor should you!
Let people grow it and sell it as well. If they can find a way to do it cheaper than a big organisation doing it on a grand scale good for them. It would be like me selling paracetamol or motorbikes I made at home.
The branded name is Sativex, available to people with ms, on prescription, has been trialed for pain relief and spasm/tremor, approved by NICE, her indoors has been using it for 12-13 years and it works.
