Cannabis

g78 · 27-05-2005, 12:09

Just watched the lunchtime news and 3 judges have decided that smoking cannabis for medical purposes, such as to relieve pain from an ongoing illness is now classed in the same catergory as someone smoking it for recreational purposes.
So a person taking cannabis for something such as arthiritus can now be classed in the same boat as a pothead.
What you all think then about this? Should it be allowed for medical reasons? Or should it be one rule for all?

Debbie J · 27-05-2005, 12:19

This is a difficult one. Anyone caught could use the excuse that it is for medicinal purposes. whether they're in pain or not. Personally I haven't got a problem with cannabis as long as I don't have to smell it. If people want to indulge for whatever reason fine. Just as long as it's not near me and they are not hurting anybody to get it.

Tealeaf · 27-05-2005, 12:32

Is there not a drug available on the NHS that contains the active ingrediant of wacky-backy and which is prescribed to MS and arteritis sufferers? If so, what are they doing smoking the stuff? I suspect that these "medical cases" are no more than your usual back-street drug dealers and users seeking a market advantage over their competitors.

Sod 'em!

garinda · 27-05-2005, 12:45

Queen Victoria used to take cocaine for pre-menstrual tension.

If it works, and is not harming anybody go for it. I know a woman who smokes it for medicinal puposes as she has M.S.
No prescribed drugs give the same benefits as dope for her.

fireman · 27-05-2005, 13:20

Could the family GP Not issue an exemption notice stating that the patient does suffer a condition which is helped by dope.

cashman · 27-05-2005, 13:27

some people in the late stages of terminal illness smoke it to help with the pain,and if it does whats the problem?

Tealeaf · 27-05-2005, 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Queen Victoria used to take cocaine for pre-menstrual tension.

If it works, and is not harming anybody go for it. I know a woman who smokes it for medicinal puposes as she has M.S.
No prescribed drugs give the same benefits as dope for her.

1) Cocaine was a legal substance right up until the 1920's...The worlds greatest detective was an addict, if you recall. However, that was way before medical science became aware of the dangers of this drug (as with all the other classified susstances)

2) Fine. Let your chum break the law. But please tell everyone else on here what laws they should be allowed to break.

lazeeboy · 27-05-2005, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by g78

Just watched the lunchtime news and 3 judges have decided that smoking cannabis for medical purposes, such as to relieve pain from an ongoing illness is now classed in the same catergory as someone smoking it for recreational purposes.
So a person taking cannabis for something such as arthiritus can now be classed in the same boat as a pothead.
What you all think then about this? Should it be allowed for medical reasons? Or should it be one rule for all?

So why are these cases brought to light?

What happened to the powers that be using their common sense, and keeping quiet?

(Yes I know common sense is not very well named, because it is not common)

Billcat · 27-05-2005, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by g78

What you all think then about this? Should it be allowed for medical reasons? Or should it be one rule for all?

Certainly there are a lot of drugs that cannot be freely bought and sold by the general public, yet can be prescribed by physicians. As an example, morphine. If marijuana is to be legally used for medical purposes but remain a controlled substance for the general population, then it should be dispensed only in properly controlled programs, with a doctor's prescription being required.

Margaret Pilkington · 27-05-2005, 20:13

I think the problem with people smoking it for pain relief.......or for relief of muscle spasm(as in MS) is that you cannot accurately assess the dosage.

When I was working in the NHS a couple of years ago they were trialling a cannabinoid (medical cannabis) for certain conditions........don't know how the trials went or if the medical cannabis was introduced.
I looked after one lady who was on the trial and sometimes she would get the medical cannabis tabs and sometimes she would get the placebo.......she said she could definitely tell the difference.

Acrylic-bob · 29-05-2005, 05:28

Speaking personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong in people who are in pain getting off their faces, if it helps them cope with it. There is far too much "advice" handed out when it comes to deciding what is safe to put in our bodies over which the "authorities" cannot seem to agree from one year to the next. Red wine is good for you, then it isn't, then it is. The same is true of Margerine and Butter, Coffee and Chocolate etc.etc, ad libitum, ad nauseam.

I think that it is about time that the finger-wagging know-it-all's and the control freaks of Whitehall and Brussels were told what to do with their "advice".

I think that the law governing the classification and control of drugs is a hopeless waste of time and resources. It would be far better to legalise the lot and control the sale through licensed outlets. At least then, if we have to put up with the consequence of people abusing substances there would be some recompense in the form of taxation to help pay for clearing up the mess. As it is, at the moment, we have all of the drawbacks and all of the bill to pay for, while all of the profits go to criminals, leaving those who are chronically ill to be criminalised along with the rest. How fair and free is that?

As far as the argument that these substances should be controlled because they can kill goes, well, so can water if you drink enough of it. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. There will always be those who feel the need to overindulge, how can you legislate against that? "But we must prevent these horrible things from falling into the hands of our children", the control freaks bleat. Has 35 years of prohibition of Cannabis really prevented it and other "controlled substances" from falling into the hands of children? It is illegal to sell alchohol and tobacco to children but does that stop them from getting their hands on it?

A free society is predicated on the principle that it's members have the freedom of choice in all things; in political and religious beliefs, in morality and ethics and everything that flows from it. It may be seen as unfortunate and regretable but freedom also means allowing people to sometimes make the wrong or mistaken choices. None of us are perfect, we all make mistakes, what monstrous arrogance it is that some of us feel the need to stand up and claim to know what is best for the rest of the population and then push that partial opinion into legislation.

Whenever the subject of controlled substances comes up in conversation, time and again the one question that is never asked is why our young feel the need to use these substances to escape temporarily? Why do they feel the need to blank out the reality of their lives? What is it about the world which we have created that appalls them so? Perhaps Nanny State, the finger-waggers and control-freaks would be better occupied in finding the answer and solution to this puzzle.

-------------------------

Interestingly, this little story has cropped up in the online version of the Guardian this morning...

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_ne...494908,00.html

cashman · 29-05-2005, 10:16

agree in the main A-B its something i have always advocated,while not saying(let em off) the cause,to me is the most important question until a cure is found for the reason its like backing a loser, a good few people disagreed with that line of thought on another thread(their right) but to me thats shortsightedness.

Tinkerbelle · 29-05-2005, 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

I see absolutely nothing wrong in people who are in pain getting off their faces, if it helps them cope with it.

I totally agree!! A member of my family smoked cannabis to help cope with the effects of cancer and knowing that it helped to take away her pain and distress when modern medicine couldn't, I say screw the law!!

Bazf · 29-05-2005, 14:33

I had a lot of pain when I was 16/17.

pendy · 01-06-2005, 17:06

I thought there was a moratorium anyway on charging people with possession if all they had was a reasonable amount of cannabis for their own use. Cannabis is very effective for MS - I worked in MS research, like Margaret, and it did help a great deal.

A-B - you mentioned that guns don't kill people, it's people who kill people. Well, now we have a total ban on legally owned handguns. So it's only the criminals who have them now, so obviously that's fine. HOWEVER, both Michael Ryan at Hungerford and the maniac at Dunblane had legally owned handguns, for which they were licensed by their local police! A ban doesn't seem to be necessarily the right thing. Better vetting of gun-owners might just work rather better - if someone is so keen on getting a shooter, they will.

And I agree, let's license drugs as well - cut out the criminal element. (Oh, sorry, forgot about those robbing b******s in the Government!)