the sun newspaper today revealed that alcohol related crime is up 59%.1,176 crimes a day happen.Cannabis is the most commlly used drug in the uk.both have long trem effects on your body.there is more trouble on our streets though alcohol than cannabis so why do the make the big deal about cannabis..it seems to show alcohol is spending more of the publics money and wasting police time. so i ask you all ARE THE POLICE AND GOVERMENT COSTING THEM SELVES MORE THAN ENOUGH MONEY BY BANNING CANNABIS AND LETTING PEOPLE DRINK .
2006-10-12 08:48:15 · 44 answers · asked by red 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Firstly, the Sun newspaper has a tendency to create moral panics about anything that goes against their (undefined) norm. It is a hodgepodge of uninformed opinion, hype, and a page - layout that defies any attempt at intelligent reading - never mind the content!. It is a Chavs Charter.
Alcohol and Cannabis are both drugs. Alcohol is socially acceptable throughout the UK community, except for extremely zealous Christians and similarly fervid adherents of Islam. Cannabis, whilst widely used amongst the Afro-Caribbean - origin community, and also by whites, still carries a stigma (label) because of its illegality, and its continued dubious position in law.
Furthermore, I am not convinced that the deletorious affects of Cannabis use have been sufficiently investigated and catalogued, and thus promulgated, by the medical sciences. This is not surprising, as Cannabis is produced, sold and consumed clandestinely. Therefore there is no 'standard' cannabis product that can be used as a basis for mensuration of the content - we have Red Leb, Skunk, various oils, and, of course, straight 'grass', but these are 'home produced', or imported, and subject to adulteration. One can measure Newcastle Brown Ale and Smirnoff Vodka, and thus predict the pathologies that arise from the consumption of these products, and one can estimate the morbidity in societal terms, but a substance as capricious as cannabis defies scientific analysis.
Alcohol is beginning to become the scourge of society as it was in the times of Hogarth's 'Gin Lane'. I am not anti-alcohol - I am drinking beer as I write this post, nor am I a prude or a Calvanist - I am sitting here, with my wife, totally naked, as she wants the heating on and I am too warm! However, we have deregulated alcohol too much. It is obtainable from supermarkets and corner shops, and people are drinking at home, free from the social controls of the old-fashioned pub, and youth is obtaining alcohol either from badly-run corner shops or from compliant adults.
Public houses have become segregated - there are ordinary pubs for social drinkers, but the town centres of even middle-sized places such as Colchester, are full of outlets that are aggressively aimed at the youth market. These are stand-up bars, with loud music and football TV. Even genteel York, that was well known in the Seventies and Eighties for a good selection of nightlife to suit all tastes, has surrendered to Youth culture. Micklegate is a human sewer. When I visited York last year, the only places where I could get a quiet drink ware a pub whose clientele are largely Gay (I am Heterosexual, but not Homophobic), or the Lounge Bar of the Railway Club. I'm glad that I was once a Railwayman!
My solution is as follows:-
Alcohol. Encourage sales to be 'on' rather than ' off' (i.e people drink in pubs, rather than at home). Licences for off sales to be restricted to pubs (all products), supermarkets (all products, but no special offers for bulk buying), specialist Off-licences such as Threshers/Unwins/Victoria Wine, for all products. Alcohol from 'off' retailers should not be available after 21.00. Off sales from pubs should be removed from the premises one hour before closing time. Pubs are to open from 11.00 to 23.00. Night clubs should be only in city centres (not medium towns) and the purchase of a meal - which should cost at least £15, and therefore will not be a hamburger, should be compulsory.
If these laws work, we can move towards liberalisation - in about 10 years, when a new attitude to alcohol has become sedimented in society.
Drugs. I suggest that we legalise the lot, and grant a monopoly to the State to produce and market them. If you take too much, then treatment should be available, on the basis that you get three chances to get yourself sorted if you use them in an irresponsible manner. After that, it is sectioning, and whatever the anti-drug equivalent of Disulfaram (Antabuse) is. This will give the Medical Profession a chance to analyse the effects of drugs, but the user will have to bear the responsibility of what would be a unique social experiment. At least people who insist on using drugs will not have to suffer ill effects from adulterants, and everyone will know where they stand.
2006-10-12 10:03:17 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The people who smoke as you say cannabis (you cannot get good hash anymore in the u.k. 'cause the government flooded the ghettos for control with heroin and then crack.) But, a lot of little cosy bars were set up, ready for a license (like in Holland where hash is illegal, but controlled in certain zones) to allow the smoking of hash on their premises, However, the big bad brewerys got worried, so got a whole new generation hooked on alcohol, via the alcho pops etc etc, slammers whatever. I drink, I would love a good hash in this country, but soapbar whats that, domestos, jif, oxo cube and glue...great. Alchol is the most depressent of all drugs, and the most violent. It keeps a lot of persons in jobs. After all, if there were a load of stoned smily people happy walking around on a Saturday night not eating smelly McDonalds and pucking up.....where would all their jobs go, It is not just permitted, it is practically enforced. Anyway I am outta u.k. in a month, sick of the open prison we have to live in.
2006-10-12 09:35:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Cannabis is a naturally occuring plant, that you can find in alot of places in nature. It is not man made, it is not addictive (except perhaps psycologically), it is not a gateway drug (sorry to disabuse you of that myth), it is not "the devil's plant."
It is however, unregulatable since the THC in it can be a little or a lot depending upon the plant or type of plant involved. This is the "main" objection the government uses to deny it a legal classification. However, as we all know, the government can and does grow its own crops, so why not use them for medical marijuana purposes?
Its all about the MONEY and pleasing the Christian Right.
2006-10-12 09:03:40 · answer #3 · answered by AdamKadmon 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I couldn't agree more. Alcohol is ten times more dangerous than weed could ever be. There's alcohol poisioning, liver damage, lung cancer, emphysema, which all result from alcohol. Not to mention that plenty of people have been killed in tragic car accidents because of idiots driving while drunk. I can't even think of any cons when it comes to marijuana. People could say that it's addictive but the same could be said about alcohol. Otherwise, the word "alcoholic" wouldn't even exist. I just don't get it........
I'm not even gonna start on cigarettes. Those are also worse than weed yet they're legal. Go figure.
2006-10-12 08:56:16 · answer #4 · answered by Tiacola Version 9.0 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of weird turns of events and concidences that have happened throughout US history that have lead to cannabis being thought of as unacceptable. It's a very strange story. There are lots of good books on the subject. The politics of the 60's and early 80's has a lot to do with it.
2006-10-12 08:54:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Either drug abused is no good. Abusing cannabis tends to keep you living in mom's basement until your 40 and unproductive, abusing alcohol will leave you with a DUI and or assault charges. Abusing either substance will adversely effect your life and the people around you.
You cannot say one substance is better than the other.
2006-10-12 08:55:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is an industry of persecuting minor drug users. If these drug offenses were legalized then many police, judges, lawyers and jailers would be out of business. And who makes the laws? Most law makers are lawyers themselves. So legalization isn't going to happen.
2006-10-12 09:00:26 · answer #7 · answered by Jabberwock 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lot of answers here...alcohol kills people, directly and indirectly, every day. Cannabis does not.
"Modern cannabis has higher levels of THC and makes young people schizophrenic!" - No proof of that (so far).
"Cannabis leads people onto harder drugs!" - that's because it's illegal and so is supplied by the same people who supply heroin and crack. And remember, all alcoholics started on milk.
Ever get in a fight because you were stoned? Thought not.
2006-10-12 09:39:38 · answer #8 · answered by brack706 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm a firm believer that too much of anything is bad in many cases eating should be banned. I've always wondered if there were no Laws against drugs if things wouldn't be better? People wouldn't steal or kill to get them because they would be dirt cheap. Abusers would burn out or commit crimes that would destroy them. I don't avocate drug use.. I dont even smoke.
2006-10-12 08:57:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you were to ban alcohol, you would have even more crime than there is now. Bootlegging, looting. I agree with your logic that marijuana is no wore than alcohol. I haven't seen too many car wrecks attributed to someone being high, as I have to people being drunk. Legalize it.
Why drink and drive when you can smoke and fly?
2006-10-12 08:52:44 · answer #10 · answered by Nep-Tunes 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋