Aberdeen Legalise Cannabis Demo - 3rd of May 2pm at the Castlegate

[Shaki]

I do think the vast majority of potheads are a bunch of dull, easily entertained pseudophilosiphising idiots though.

I know many vivacious pot heads who are far from easily entertained and I don't know any that are paedophiles.

You don't have to be a bunch of potheads either. Cannabis can be used alone and can make for an enjoyable evening.

Certainly cannabis induced mental illness is fact and will be severely traumatic for the sufferer and their friends and families but would incidents in this rise if it was legalised? Someone get me some stats from Holland or something.....

Then there's the whole thing about funding terrorist cells and modern day Al Capones and that.....and.......erm, what were we talking about again? giggle. munch. Yeah, so who's all up for that march?

[Stripey]

Ummmmm, no. Wanting the removal of section 28 was wanting a piece of discrimination removed. Section 28 had the effect of making it illegal for teachers to 'promote' homosexuality which, at that time, made it illegal for teachers to say that homosexual relationships were equal with what the state was, at that time, promoting (hetrosexual marriage). Wanting that removed was not an attempt to get special rights or privileges, it was an attempt to have equality. At that time the law prevented the two being called equal. Political correctness and all that came way after the first anti-section 28 campaign.

You're wrong, and tragically naive in a fashion so stereotypical of the average pothead pretend-politico. Go and read some actual philosophy because you're clearly in desperate need of a fucking clue.

[Bear]

Oh thats right because your right to get high is more important than reigning in miltarly adventurism by our government which has caused the deaths of over a million innocent civilians in the last 5 years alone.

As it just so happens I protested against the Iraq war very strongly and helped organise the demonstrations against it in Aberdeen. I also wrote to my MP urging them not to support the invasion. What to do now that all hell has been unleashed is another matter. I think they'll be a civil war and 3 states and that we need to be prepared for that, but that's just my opinion, I don't have crystal ball.

You don't really know anything about me, so please don't presume too. Just because I care about one cause doesn't mean I don't care about another.

But stopping the drugs war is about more than just my right to get high. The government's anti-drug policies are responsible for the majority of crime in this country, organised crime controlling the 2nd biggest commodity market in the world (after oil), and 3rd world producer countries being destabilised.

[Bear]

Certainly cannabis induced mental illness is fact and will be severely traumatic for the sufferer and their friends and families but would incidents in this rise if it was legalised? Someone get me some stats from Holland or something.....

Here's an interesting stat from the UK. Since cannabis was reclassified from class B to class C and made slightly less illegal it's use has actually fallen. Meanwhile the number of cases of mental illness which some people attributing to cannabis use has risen from 1.2% to 1.4% (I think). So whilst cases of mental illness have risen, use of the substance blamed for it has actually fallen.

If there is a link, and I personally think there is, it may be due to stronger strains. And that's just a result of prohibition, no regulation or quality control. Alcohol prohibition gave the USA moonshine and dangerous bath tub gin, cannabis prohibition (or rather a lack of regulation in this case) has given us 'super-skunk' and crack cocaine.

[Stripey]

As it just so happens I protested against the Iraq war very strongly and helped organise the demonstrations against it in Aberdeen. I also wrote to my MP urging them not to support the invasion. What to do now that all hell has been unleashed is another matter. I think they'll be a civil war and 3 states and that we need to be prepared for that, but that's just my opinion, I don't have crystal ball.

Yeah no crystal ball and no idea what you're talking about either. The secterian division of Iraq is totally artifical, has no precedent and has only been encouraged and stimulated by the americans because it's in their interest to get them fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting the occupiers.

Have you written to your MP yet to protest the constant stream of anti-iranian propaganda flooding the airwaves and the agitation for war with Iran? I suggest you do so now.

The government's anti-drug policies are responsible for the majority of crime in this country, organised crime controlling the 2nd biggest commodity market in the world (after oil), and 3rd world producer countries being destabilised.

Fucking hell. Anti-drug policies have nothing to do with the destabilisation of "3rd world producer countries". The taleban had all but eliminated the production of raw opium in afghanistan, now we and the yanks went in and "destabilised" the country, bumper harvests are being reported and more heroin than ever is going to hit the streets of the west. This is because of a policy of military adventurism, not because of anti-drug laws.

Do you really think a fucking heroin addict cares who they buy the hit from? They will still go out robbing, or prositituting themselves regardless of wether the state or a mafia has control of the drug. It doesn't matter who controls these drugs there will always be the same crime statistics, unless you are proposing giving the stuff away free.

[Shaki]

Do you really think a fucking heroin addict cares who they buy the hit from? They will still go out robbing, or prositituting themselves regardless of wether the state or a mafia has control of the drug. It doesn't matter who controls these drugs there will always be the same crime statistics, unless you are proposing giving the stuff away free.

Crystal Ball tell you that then?

[Stripey]

If there is a link, and I personally think there is, it may be due to stronger strains. And that's just a result of prohibition, no regulation or quality control. Alcohol prohibition gave the USA moonshine and dangerous bath tub gin, cannabis prohibition (or rather a lack of regulation in this case) has given us 'super-skunk' and crack cocaine.

You have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

Weed is stronger now because people have, over time, selectively bred strains for their potency, produced stable hybrids and made the seeds widely available. Cultivation techniques have been fine tuned over the years to make it very easy to mass produce highly potent buds. This has fuck all to do with prohibition, it is a matter of common-sense horticulture, and it would have occured anyway if weed was legal. It also bears no relation to the production of crack.

The widespread use of crack has nothing to do with the law and everything to do with common economics. Crack is a product that sells, it is cheap to produce in terms of how much raw coke is required, cheap to buy (per hit), and it is a product that addicts people quickly.The concept of basifying cocaine hydrochloride into a smokeable form itself has absolutely nothing to do with prohibition either.

[soundian]

Who cares what the dividing line is, apart from pricks who want to tell other people what to do?

Does anyone else see the irony in this statement?

[Cabbage]

wait...... this march is THIS saturday, not the saturday past????

...... you mean to tell me i sent out my nedlings on their motorbikes to twart the stoner uprising on the wrong day!!! DAAAAAAAMMMMNNN!!!!!DAAAAAAAMMMMNNN!!!!!DAAAAAAAMMMMNNN!!!!!

next time i'm just going to have to use the death ray instead of those hired goons......

[jamesbroonbreed]

if it's made legal then drug dealers will be put out of business which is totally unfair for them.

keep it illegal and add more diesel to rocky I reckon

[Bear]

Yeah no crystal ball and no idea what you're talking about either. The secterian division of Iraq is totally artifical, has no precedent and has only been encouraged and stimulated by the americans because it's in their interest to get them fighting amongst themselves instead of fighting the occupiers.

So you're saying that the only reason the Iraqi's are slaughtering each other is because the Americans have encouraged them to? Nothing to do with it being a tribal society made up of different ethnic and religious groups, some off whom hate each other and have scores to settle for things done under Saddam's time? Nothing to do with the Sunni terrorists from all over the world crossing the borders and blowing up Shia Mosques to start a civil war, made worse by the fact the country is awash with weapons? Do you really believe the whole reason the Iraqi's are slaughtering each other is because the Americans are encouraging them? C'mon Honestly?

Anti-drug policies have nothing to do with the destabilisation of "3rd world producer countries". The taleban had all but eliminated the production of raw opium in afghanistan, now we and the yanks went in and "destabilised" the country, bumper harvests are being reported and more heroin than ever is going to hit the streets of the west. This is because of a policy of military adventurism, not because of anti-drug laws.

I was actually thinking about the long running civil wars, funded by the cocaine trade, in South America and the corruption drug money causes in their governments - it's all very destablising. I don't know if the Taleban banned opium production to push the price of their stock piles up (which they apparently kept on selling), or if they genuinely wanted it stopped, but I do know the war lords in Afganistan are getting some of their funding from it now. I also know that the Taleban are probably the most brutal bunch of hate-filled cunts on the planet who's goal was nothing short of dragging the entire world back into the darkages. Life under the Taleban would be hellish, I've nothing good to say about them.

Do you really think a fucking heroin addict cares who they buy the hit from? They will still go out robbing, or prositituting themselves regardless of wether the state or a mafia has control of the drug. It doesn't matter who controls these drugs there will always be the same crime statistics, unless you are proposing giving the stuff away free.

Personally I see heroin addiction as more of a social and medical problem than a criminal one and as such believe it probably should be prescribed, so yes, in a sense it would be 'free'. No worse than giving the methidone only more likely to work I think.

I'll reply to the rest of your posts when I have more time, maybe. Wasn't gonna reply to any of it because I'm tired but the 'Americans want Iraqis to slaughter each other' post really stuck out and made we wanna ask because I couldn't believe what I was reading. You honestly think the USA wants to stay in Iraq forever and is trying to provoke a civil war there?

[jamesbroonbreed]

You honestly think the USA wants to stay in Iraq forever and is trying to provoke a civil war there?

I wouldnt put it past them.

you gotta pick a pocket or two.

[Bear]

But do you see any real evidence of that?

I mean it's not the USA that is using suicide bombers to slaughter the Shia, is it?

Is it in the USA's interest to see a civil war in Iraq? If anything it looks to me like they fucked the whole thing up so badly they are spending billions sending extra troops there in a desperate attempt to prevent one from happening. Iraq has been a complete and utter disaster, but I can't honestly believe they (or we) wanted this disaster to happen. I really don't think they wanted, or expected, to be trapped a Vietnam part II type quagmire having to send tens of thousands of troops to prevent the place descending into all out civil war.

[Stripey]

So you're saying that the only reason the Iraqi's are slaughtering each other is because the Americans have encouraged them to? Nothing to do with it being a tribal society made up of different ethnic and religious groups, some off whom hate each other and have scores to settle for things done under Saddam's time? Nothing to do with the Sunni terrorists from all over the world crossing the borders and blowing up Shia Mosques to start a civil war, made worse by the fact the country is awash with weapons? Do you really believe the whole reason the Iraqi's are slaughtering each other is because the Americans are encouraging them? C'mon Honestly?

You have no idea what you're talking about, again.

Iraq is not a sectarian society' date=' but a tribal society. People are intermarried. Shiites and Sunnis marry each other. It's not a question of having a huge block of people here called Shiites and a huge block of people called Sunnis any more than you can do the same with the United States, saying Blacks are here and Protestants are here and so on.[/quote']

Lateline - 02/03/2006: Robert Fisk shares his Middle East knowledge

read this article.

I was actually thinking about the long running civil wars, funded by the cocaine trade, in South America

Civil wars which were deliberately started by the americans, who were funding and arming rebel groups. This is a matter of the record, and you've just contradicted yourself. Go and read about american involvement in nicaragua, chile, columbia and ecuador because again you have no idea what you're talking about.

Who do you think buys all that cocaine? Where do you think the market is that creates that industry?

Personally I see heroin addiction as more of a social and medical problem than a criminal one and as such believe it probably should be prescribed, so yes, in a sense it would be 'free'. No worse than giving the methidone only more likely to work I think.

Ok, so your solution to the social ills caused by heroin is to give addicts heroin instead of methadone. How exactly will changing the substance the state uses to wean them off the drug (because I'm assuming you aren't advocating a policy along the lines of "oh I see you're a heroin addict, here have some heroin along with your dole cheque for the rest of your life") eliminate problems such as drug related crime and prositution?

Do you really think heroin addicts on methadone reduction programs don't just view it as a freebie supplement to their habit?

You honestly think the USA wants to stay in Iraq forever and is trying to provoke a civil war there?

They have just completed construction of an embassy almost as big as the vatican city, what do you think?

[Stripey]

I don't know if the Taleban banned opium production to push the price of their stock piles up (which they apparently kept on selling), or if they genuinely wanted it stopped, but I do know the war lords in Afganistan are getting some of their funding from it now. I also know that the Taleban are probably the most brutal bunch of hate-filled cunts on the planet who's goal was nothing short of dragging the entire world back into the darkages. Life under the Taleban would be hellish, I've nothing good to say about them.

The taleban banned opium production because they are religious zealots, they were most certainly *not* stockpiling opium whilst banning it in attempt to push up the value of opium.

Their "goal" was not "dragging the entire world back into the darkages" either, you should stop reading the gutter press because you're pathetically uninformed.

[Old Gold]

Jings, who knew that Stripey was such a Righty?

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

Well then, firstly KR, yes, my opposition to prohibition is based on philosophical reasons vis-a-vis cognitive liberty, not just a personal situation, I feel the same about substances I would not touch with a shitty stick.

As for Libertarian Socialism, the beauty of it is that, in my interpretation, there is no dogmatic position to fall back on, and so responses to circumstances must be thought out, rather than taken from a prior position, so there is no one all-defining homogenous 'Libertarian Socialism', rather a constant questioning by people with similar outlooks, in fact a singular definition of libertarian anything would be inherently oxymoronic.

Well this thread has run and run, and nothing anyone has said has convinced me that I could safely entrust the regulation of my brain chemistry to another person, so I will finish off in a slightly different vein (JUNKIE!!!)

1) I believe that the goverment have the right to determine my Brain and Body Chemistry because...

a-They are the government, they always know best don't they

b- If we are told that Cannabis leads to harder drugs then it must be true, they don't just make stuff up

c-If people just think they can do what they want, then they will.

d-I can't be trusted to make my own decisions on this, so would rather someone did it for me.

e-I just want to be normal

just tick the one that apllies to you, or not.

[Bear]

You have no idea what you're talking about, again.

you're pathetically uninformed.

Gee... I don't have much going for me, do I? Could list more comments like this if I went back a few pages, but what's the point?. . . . . . .

Stripey, have you ever considered I might have read many of the same things you have, weighted up the evidence (as I'm sure you have), and just reached a different set of conclusions? Thanks for the link to the Robert Fisk thing by the way, I've actually read a lot of his articles before in the Independent (not sure if you consider that to be part of the "gutter press" or not though).

This thread is about the demo planned on Saturday I don't want to totally derail it thread so I'm going to respond to your points about the civil war in Iraq, the ideology of the Taliban, the illegal drugs trade destabilising 3rd world producer countries and what could be done with heroin addicts under a policy regulation once, and very quickly, and leave it at that.

The civil war in Iraq,

Sorry no. I don't believe the Americans are actively trying to encourage the Iraqi's to slaughter each other. The war appears to have gone badly wrong for the USA rather than along the lines of a sinister plan that's benefited them. Bush sacked advisor's for saying it could cost $100 billion (I think it was), the cost of the war has now eclipsed even the most pessimistic predictions; and the deficit it has caused has badly damaged America's currency. The Iraq war has now cost, in real terms, more than America's 13 year war in Vietnam. A civil war in Iraq would be a disaster for America, it could spill over into other countries and affect the West's access to oil. I was against the war because I thought it might turn out like this, it has all the hallmarks of being a complete fuck up. There is also plenty of evidence for me to believe that some groups in Iraq want to kill each other. Saddam's ruling Sunni regime committed terrible crimes against the Kurds (who I think would like their own state) and the Shia. Religious Sunni zealots have crossed into Iraq and are slaughtering the Shia (who they consider to be heretics who deserve to die) with suicide bombs and they're blowing up their mosques. This is leading to revenge killings against Sunni's, which leads to revenge killings by Sunni's etc, etc... There is also plenty of natural resources to fight over. Battles for oil fields, grudges, revenge attacks, religious divisions and zealotory, plenty of guns etc... Plenty evidence that they're doing this all by themselves... Now I know that you already know all of this. The difference is you have weighted up the evidence for yourself and reached a different conclusion, that's all. It doesn't mean that I'm just an ignorant gutter press reading twat who deserves your contempt, although if that's what you think of me I really couldn't give a shit.

The ideology of the Taliban,

There is plenty of evidence to suggest the Taliban (especially the foreign ones who invaded Afghanistan to spread their ideology) and sheltered Osama Bin Laden have a very similar ideology to Osama Bin Laden and the Whabbists who fund it. These people want the restoration of the Caliphate, and that's just for starters. As for opium production the Taliban did not destroy the stocks of the drug they said they wanted to eradicate, we know this because Afghanistan's stocks were dumped on market just before the US and British invaded, I can only presume they were worried we destroyed them. Apparently prices were as cheap as $30 a kilo before the ban, shot up to $700 a kilo after they banned it and dumping them their stocks before the invasion reduced the price to around $100 (or so they say anyway) The Taliban opium connection - Middle East Times There is also the fact that when the Taliban banned opium they were in the process of trying to get the world to recognise their regime. And in Afghanistan right now, the highest levels of opium production just happen to be in the areas where the Taliban is strongest. Of course, I know you probably already know this. You've just reached a different conclusion, which is fine.

The war on drugs destabilising 3rd world producer countries,

Actually to much for this time at night. The evidence that the Taliban in Afghanistan and various groups in South America get funding via illegal drug production is huge, there is also the problem of the money corrupting their government in the form of bribes etc... Masses of evidence for that point of view here Transform : TDPF

What to do for heroin addicts,

Well I'd suggest coping a country with a policy that actually works. How about Swiss model, that's proven to work.

[Stripey]

Sorry, I didn't read your ridiculously verbose response because your previous statements have already made it quite clear how little you know about middle eastern politics and the war on drugs.

Enjoy your legalisation march anyway I'm sure it will be fun.

[Hog]

I was reading one, very biast newspaper that they were blaming Cannabis as the reason why Luke Mitchell killed his girlfriend lol. Apparently he smoked 600 joints per week....em.....I wonder what would happen if he drank 600 beers per week?

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

Yeah, but if it was soap bar then 600 joints might give you a slight buzz, if that.

Recent UK research has shown that roughly 800 people a year are driven to hospital treatment by cannabis use, out of a population of 58m, more people suffer alcohol psychosis every weekend. Half of the 'horror' stories you here are some middle-englander-dailymail-woman, freaking out cos her son can't be arsed going to Uni anymore, not exactly 'Christiane F'* is it.

*70s autobiography of Berlin schoolgirl turned heroin addict, scary stuff.

[Shaki]

I was reading one, very biast newspaper that they were blaming Cannabis as the reason why Luke Mitchell killed his girlfriend lol. Apparently he smoked 600 joints per week....em.....I wonder what would happen if he drank 600 beers per week?

erm, that's 85 joints a day, which is 3.5 joints an hour (provided you don't go to bed). He must have been pretty nifty at skinning up! There's no way anyone could be arsed brutally murdering someone if they were that stoned.....unless it was the sleep deprivation that drove him to it?

[jamesbroonbreed]

maybe he was totally tripping off of his goof balls or something and it seemed like the decent thing to do.

[Bear]

Cannabis reclassification (so I read) is due soon, probably next week if the newspapers are right.

There is a good (and very opinionated) article by Simon Jenkins on the Guardian website about it anyone's interested Simon Jenkins: The only message being sent is of cowardice and stupidity | Comment is free | The Guardian

[Pierre Von Mondragon]

Not to mention yesterdays headline that the Association of Chiefs of Police have said it will not affect their arrest and caution policy. It is empty posturing, the worst sort of gesture politics, and goes contrary to the fact that the previous reclassification was proving effective in reducing use. But Mr Brown (is a clown who rides around the town, ta Bob) is not interested in that, and would prefer to play politics with peoples lives.