Atheist Ireland Forum

I do see change coming in this area. It has started in some parts of the US namely California and Washington and will come to other liberal states such as New York, Illinois and New Jersey. Shortly enough I expect it to be decriminalized in small amounts at a federal level, like it has been in Mexico and Canada. I expect the EU to loosen its laws as well over the coming years.

The main reason I believe for this shift is due to the growing skepticism of the war on drugs. Ireland will lag behind but will follow like it usually does.

Full legalization I suspect will be much much slower.

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/cal ... 79819.html







There is an update to this issue. It seems with the recession people are looking for big money items to tax that will stimulate the economy.

I'd have to include the caveat that we simply wouldn't see the same financial benefit as the Californians. There would definitely be a lot of money in it.

I stand by my opinion that this is the start of decriminalizing at a federal level in the U.S. and should this come to be - Europe and Ireland will slowly follow. The debate should begin with ourselves - the Irish public might be debating it in a few years.

it's not all happy bunnies
http://priory.com/psych/cannabis.htm

I found this somewhat ironic given your username then again my avatar does look like a nug of weed so who am I to judge.
I'm not necessarily replying to you but your link does make a good point about the the obvious. How safe is it?

Safety of Marijuana for Recreational Purposes
There are dangers and it's up to me to make a case to convince those who are skeptical that legalizing marijuana is safe so please be as critical of anything I say as you possibly can. A lot of damage done to society often actually comes from the criminalization of drugs so please keep this in mind when weighing up the pros and cons as highlighted by Nozz earlier in this thread.

Yes, there are risks with any such substance. Marijuana is no different. Alcohol and tobacco also have risks but most people happily tolerate these drugs. Academy of Medical Sciences in the UK produced a drug ranking a few years back that caused some controversy. A senior government medical advisor (David Nutt) criticized the status quo classification who headed the same drug ranking.



His findings to say the least were not convenient to the Labour administration at the time and he was sacked. Essentially looking at the chart you should see how dangerous marijuana and ecstasy are to drugs like tobacco and alcohol. Both these drugs cause problems.

The governments justification was wishy washy at best drawing reference to:
1. It's traditional to ban drugs.
2. It's what people want.

Not exactly the epitome of evidence based policy making.



Much of the scientific community were disappointed in the governments decision to sack him and many gave their public support to Nutt. He was objective and meticulous in his work and it was peer reviewed and it received the approval of those in his field. This shows how much of the stigma and fear associated with recreational drugs is mostly populist and political with little basis in real evidence. By legalizing we can control strain and subsequently the potency and overall quality of the drug and help minimise the many of the harmful effects that your paper linke to draws attention on.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6474053.stm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/commen ... 898671.ece
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Nutt
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009 ... hnson-nutt

There is minimal support for it in the government but I would expect that to change if the Irish public did. One of the few supporters on marijuana legalization is one of the few sensible politicians we have Ivana Bacik.

There's a Channel Four documentary on tonight at eight about how the War on Drugs seems to be doing more harm than good. The film also includes a talk with sacked government advisor Prof. David Nutt. For what it's worth:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/our- ... /episode-1

If you missed it, it'll be available on 4oD as soon as possible after the initial broadcast.

Something I always find useful to point out in these debates is the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation.

It's not legal to run a red light or drive faster than the speed limit, but it is also not criminal. Likewise, if marijuana were decriminalised, it would mean that posession is not a criminal offence but that does not make it legal. It would simply mean that it is not a criminal offence to possess or use it. You may however be fined because it would still be illegal.

The debate of whether marijuana should be decriminalised or legalised are two very different debates. Legalisation is likely to mean you could walk into a store and buy it and then use it. The kind of store you could buy it from and where you can use it, of course, would depend on how it is regulated.

If it is decriminalised you could probably get a way with growing small quantities of it yourself but it still won't be legal. If you're caught with it you're likely to be fined unless the authorities are instructed to turn a blind eye. Dealing of course would most likely remain a criminal act along with possession of more than a specified small quantity.

Did anyone see the program Our drugs war On channel 4?

A adviser of the britsh government got sacked because he publicly said that it was saver to take MDA then alcohol. My point exactly. Alcohol is a class A drugs if it was introduced now.

Very good program,

I have smoked pot and eaten it in buns & cookies, but not for quite a few years and not very often. I don't smoke, so don't like smoking pot. And you need larger quantities of it for baking, so the legal risk doesn't seem worth it.

On the grounds that alcohol, caffeine and tobacco are legalized drugs, I would be of the opinion that Cannabis should be legalized too. The associated health risks and social costs are way lower than tobacco and there seems to be some good evidence that it's about as addictive as caffeine. I think half the danger with cannabis is perceived rather than real, whereas with alcohol and tobacco, the risks are very real.

About the only half-way decent argument I've heard against cannabis is that it's a gateway drug to worse things. But then, if you could buy it in Spar instead of from a criminal who wants to get you from pot to crack as soon as possible, then it probably wouldn't be. The biggest gateway drug of them all is alcohol, and that's legalised and controlled.

I think there's a lot to be said for Nozz's argument for de-criminalising and controlling the sale of all drugs, including opiates. There's no logical reason to assume this would bring about a worse state of affairs than the one we currently have, and some good evidence that it may improve things.

The gateway argument is a poor one. There are a huge number of things that can be abused.

Anything that gives humans a "hit" stands the chance of becoming a substance whose intake some people really struggle to control. This would include alcohol, food (especially if it has sugar or fats in it), tobacco, coffee etc.

The thing is, these substances don't automatically enslave everyone. For whatever reason, some people appear to be more susceptible than others to addiction of one variety or another. The majority of people appear quite capable of regulating their own intake of addictive substances.

Legalising the stuff on the forbidden list is not going to turn any country into a junkie nation. What it will do is get rid of the crime-lord problem that currently characterises the drug world at the moment; and also probably prevent many drug-related deaths of those who run into trouble with them. Once drugs are legalised there is no longer a social barrier to seeking medical assistance.

Portugal did legalise drug use in 2001. The results: overall drug use fell, and fell fastest in the teenage group. The number of people in drug rehabilitation (i.e. wanting to get off them permanently) is up. http://www.johannhari.com/category/Drug%20Legalisation (read especially the essay Face the Facts & end the War on Drugs.

The reason why politicians don't use the common sense and science facts to make their policies is simple: they are afraid of committing political suicide knowing that their voters are largely ignorant on the subject. And they are probably right if you look at the cases in the UK of David Nutt and Evan Harris.

You raise a valid point about decriminalizing versus legalization. It isn't entirely clear in my posts either. This example might not be the best as all traffic offenses in Ireland are criminal but there are loop holes to avoid criminal prosecution. However the sentiment remains true.

Even setting asside the positive effects in relation to drug abuse itself, I remember the last time this debate was raised in Australia, the main argument given was that the majority of crimes are drug related. Not sure if that's true of Ireland. Of course there is the gang warfare stuff, but most break-ins, thefts and armed robberies are perpetrated by people who need money to buy drugs.

What would the organised criminals do for money if we legalised drugs and prostitution? How much extra money would the exchequer have in its coffers?

Those headshops weren't being firebombed by angry anti-drug activists. Those were angry drug dealers.

Pretty much any prohibited substance creates an opportunity for criminals to provide it illicitly. Just like alcohol during US prohibition. Drugs are an opportunity for certain people to make huge sums of money. Remove the opportunity and they basically don't have jobs left. I'd imagine there would be a brief period of inter-gang warfare while psychos fight over the reduced spoils, followed by a drop in violent crime.

If the government made it free to addicts that would completely wipe out all criminal activity and allow a large number of functional addict to avoid criminal behaviour and get on with their lives and jobs. I bet there are a good amount of self-prescribing doctors who function fine because they can self medicate and don’t have to go around thieving in order to fund their habit.

During the US prohibition the American government made the situation much worse - it deliberately poisoned it’s ethanol to deter drinkers from drinking it and also drinkers had to start on the very - very hard stuff that might blind or kill them and not the milder beers and wines.

Lengthy Acticle:
Is it time to turn over a new leaf?

What's the story in Australia?