BF2S Forums UK Drug Laws = Epic Fail

A step in the wrong direction. Legalise it.

- It'll generate more revenue via tax
- It'll stop funding criminals, and everything associated with the trade of it
- There will be more regulation, you'll get less of the harmful skunk forms and more of the more decent/legit forms

This isn't going to affect me though, I'm still going to do it.

Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-05-07 12:36:59)

im glad i live in Canada

The research says there is no evidence for claims that most cannabis consumed in Britain and the rest of Europe is now 10 times or more stronger than it was in the 70s.

I always wondered about this
Sounded like b.s. scare tactics

There has always been 'Strong stuff' and milder varieties, it seems to me

Sure some of the growing techniques have been perfected, and there are potent strains.. but it's still basically the same plant.

EPIC fail law.
Guy gets cought with some weed while relaxing after a long week. He looses his job and ends up on welfare or with a crap underpayed job. Costs the goverment a lot of money. His kid grows up poor in a bad neighbourhood and turns to crime or gives up on education to help out with the bills.
He grows up with a criminal record and offers no hope for his children and so on and so on.
According to some documentaries I watched, this happened in some parts of USA on epic scales.

Vax wrote:

The research says there is no evidence for claims that most cannabis consumed in Britain and the rest of Europe is now 10 times or more stronger than it was in the 70s.

I always wondered about this
Sounded like b.s. scare tactics

There has always been 'Strong stuff' and milder varieties, it seems to me

Sure some of the growing techniques have been perfected, and there are potent strains.. but it's still basically the same plant.

The growing techniques are more for yield, to have more plant mass to sell, and not potency.  Not to say people haven't tried but the truth is nature has done a pretty good job already.

The problem is that governments measure potency on the proportion of THC when pot has many canabinols in it's make-up.  Then there are the strains, Sativa vs Indica.  Sativa being more of a head stone and Indica more of a body buzz.  The so called "Super Skunk" is just a good variety of Sativa with the right mix of canabinols to make it feel stronger when the truth is it isn't.  The same amount of stuff is there, only in different proportions although D9THC has remained around 6-7%.

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

A step in the wrong direction. Legalise it.

- It'll generate more revenue via tax
- It'll stop funding criminals, and everything associated with the trade of it
- There will be more regulation, you'll get less of the harmful skunk forms and more of the more decent/legit forms

This isn't going to affect me though, I'm still going to do it.

Disagree, if you're ever caught, rather than just get a slap on the wrist and get your pot taken off you, you'll potentially get taken down to the police station and go to court, unlike when it was a class C drug. This of course depends on the police's attitude to it, hopefully they won't bother arresting people because of it.

EDIT: Reading about it in the BBC today, I was interested to discover that shrooms are class A drugs, whereas they're legal (atm) in the Netherlands. Or are they just referring to dried shrooms?

Last edited by ghettoperson (2008-05-07 14:20:09)

Make legal and tax the shit out it like they do cigarettes and alcohol everybodies happy

JahManRed wrote:

They spend our money funding research and a panel of experts and then totally ignore them. Idiots.

That's what most annoys me about the re-classification of cannabis.

The experts, paid by the government, produce a clear ranking of social harm, but the government, who wanted just that in the first place, just ignore it.

The only conclusion one can reach is that the experts just weren't saying what the government wanted to hear.

A few facts for you all about cannabis: Yes it is stronger than 30 years ago
NO ,skunk and its various varieties are NOT the strongest strains you can get. Skunk no1 and superskunk has about 8-11% thc content
Strains like white russian a x of white widow and AK47 are among the strongest with thc content around 20% also HH { hollands highest } and blueberry are among the stronger strains.

Skunk strains are more commonly Indica. Sativa grows tall and leggy while indica grows short and stocky which is why it became so popular in that its easier to grow indoors plus you tend to get a better yield from an indica plant.

Technology has produced bigger yields there is a hormone you can add that stops all vertical growth during the flowering period and makes the plant use all its resources for bud production.

Anyone have any questions I'd be happy to answer them. I dont want you to think i'm boasting but i know more about weed than most people from 20 yrs personal experience.

Last edited by miley (2008-05-08 02:03:11)

Note for OP...all drug laws = epic fail.

No matter how many drug laws governments put in place, there will always be users and dealers, because it makes the dealers money. Dealers get rich, users get hooked and dependant on it, therefore buying more, making the dealers richer and the users more fucked in their situation.
A prison sentence may put off a few users, but wont make any more difference to its users. All the people I know who do this kind of stuff are totally screwed up, and they are in their early 20's. But they dont care, even if they are a waste of space.

So long as there is society, there will always be crime. Which means smuggling, growing, dealing and taking of shit like this too. Legalising and regulating all/most drugs wont make any difference, look at dvd/video game ratings and alcohol: just get an older friend to buy it, and voila, you have it. How often do you see/hear of 12-14year olds pissed out of their face on the local wreck on the weekends, or playing GTA4 when its clearly an 18? If they can do it for those examples, drugs will be no problem.

As far as Im concerned, if you need this kind of thing to get you through the day or have a good time, you have serious issues. Still, your choice.

Wow. A lot of crazy stuff being posted....

OK. First up:

ReTox wrote:

They cited the idea that pot is much stronger these days which most tokers know is a lie.

It's not a lie. Carefully cultivated skunk strains are far stronger than anything that used to be available.

Dilbert_X wrote:

People can gripe about the 'unfairness' of tobacco and alcohol being legal but the fact is they were invented today they would be illegal too.

Are you completely retarded? Invented today? For a start organic drugs are not invented. Secondly cannabis has been in widespread use for many, many centuries. The hemp plant was exceedingly important and it used to be illegal not to grow hemp if you had a certain amount of land.

Now, onto addressing sensible points:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

JahManRed wrote:

They spend our money funding research and a panel of experts and then totally ignore them. Idiots.

That's what most annoys me about the re-classification of cannabis.

The experts, paid by the government, produce a clear ranking of social harm, but the government, who wanted just that in the first place, just ignore it.

The only conclusion one can reach is that the experts just weren't saying what the government wanted to hear.

They'd made their minds up already. Scientific experts, pffff, what do they know. They (the government and police) want to send a message. It's nothing to do with the harmfulness, they just don't want people smoking it. They're doing their level best to stop anyone doing anything that's the slightest bit bad for them, talk about nanny-state...

Did you hear the stupid proposals for needing to buy a permit to be able to buy cigarettes? They wanted people to apply for permits, costing £10 each, which would need to be produced to buy cigarettes anywhere. The permit would be valid for 1 year. Thankfully, that stupid idea never came to fruition, but it illustrates the lengths they are prepared to go to.

ghettoperson wrote:

Disagree, if you're ever caught, rather than just get a slap on the wrist and get your pot taken off you, you'll potentially get taken down to the police station and go to court, unlike when it was a class C drug. This of course depends on the police's attitude to it, hopefully they won't bother arresting people because of it.

That's what always used to happen when it was class B. The only times I've been caught with weed are when it was class B, the police just told me to chuck it away (onto a railway embankment) and then I went on my way (round the corner and halfway down the embankment to reclaim my weed).

Of course some of the police are pricks. But that's always going to be the case.

syndicat111 wrote:

Lib something?

If you want to do something about the state of this country, they're a good name to remember next time we go to the polling station.

They're pro-legalisation and pro-proportional representation.

At the very least, a swing towards lib-dem in the general populous would most likely create a hung-parliament. Hung-parliaments can be very good for democracy.