Legalise It?

Pommy bastard said :

Tooks said :

Remember, it’s already decriminalised in the ACT, so unless your growing pounds of the stuff, or dealing it, you have little to worry about if you’re smoking it in your own home.

This is a myth.

It’s illegal to grow it, possess it or sell it. Possession of less than 25g is punishable by a fine of one penalty unit, possession of more than that is punishable by up to 50 penalty units, 2 years imprisonment, or both.

The point I was trying make was that if you’re just a casual smoker, the police are unlikely to bust your door down to seize that packed bong sitting on your coffee table.

Also, if you’re found in possession of a small amount, it can be dealt with by SCON (simple cannabis offence notice), rather than going to court – hence no criminal conviction.

JUDGES and magistrates in NSW are appalled at the epidemic level of alcohol-fuelled crime in their courts, which accounts for more than half of their work and includes violence they never imagined when they started on the bench.

They revealed their concerns as part of an investigation involving 22 on-the-record interviews with judges and magistrates.

Alcohol plays a role in 50 to 60 per cent of the nearly 300,000 criminal cases that come before the state’s Local Courts each year, Chief Magistrate Graeme Henson said.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/judges-fed-up-with-drunken-violence-clogging-our-courts-20101016-16oap.html

Here’s a little anecdotal tale, believe it if you wish or not.

In the area of Devon UK I used to live there were four night clubs. Three were booze barns, one was known as a “rave” venue which only sold soft drinks and water. During a hearing it was revealed by police that on an average Friday or Saturday, they had between 5-7 call outs, normally for violence and vandalism, to each of the booze barns. The ambulance service gave the three booze barns 8-10 call outs on a weekend, normally with police protection.

The rave club had on average two call outs by police/ambulance every four months.

Guess which club the police were at court for, successfully, getting shut down?

Tooks said :

Remember, it’s already decriminalised in the ACT, so unless your growing pounds of the stuff, or dealing it, you have little to worry about if you’re smoking it in your own home.

This is a myth.

It’s illegal to grow it, possess it or sell it. Possession of less than 25g is punishable by a fine of one penalty unit, possession of more than that is punishable by up to 50 penalty units, 2 years imprisonment, or both.

Selling cannabis (or possessing it for sale) can get up to 500 penalty units or 5 years imprisonment, or both.

Growing one or two plants, without hydroponics or artificial heat or light, is punishable by one penalty unit. Growing three or more, or artificially growing one or two, is punishable by 200 penalty units or 2 years imprisonment.

Growing a ‘large commercial quantity’ (currently 125kg) can get you life imprisonment. A ‘commercial quantity’ (25kg) gets 25 years or 2500 penalty units, or both. For a trafficable quantity (300g) it’s 10 years or 1000 penalty units, or both. For less than that, it’s 300 penalty units or 3 years.

These offences require that the accused intended to sell some part of some of the plants, or knew that someone else would. But this is assumed if the quantity is at least 300g (so you would have to prove that you didn’t intend to sell anything, rather than the prosecution proving that you did).

And I think that about covers it. Oh, and a penalty unit is currently $110 for a person, or $550 for a corporation. So to work out the maximum fine, multiply the number of penalty units by 110.

Source(s):
Schedule 1 of the Criminal Code Regulations 2005 sets out the various quantities of drugs: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_reg/ccr2005206/sch1.html

Part 10 of the Drugs of Dependance Act 1989 contains some cannabis offences: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_act/doda1989169/

The more serious ones are in Chapter 6 of the Criminal Code 2002:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_act/cc200294/

MrPC said :

Typically people under 18 will want to do something more if they are told they can’t do it.

The only people (#21 Tooks) who think decriminalising/legalising something will make children want to use more clearly either aren’t parents or aren’t very successful parents. Saying no is what makes them want it more. Saying yes or not caring will cause them to lose interest either immediately or after the first few attempts.

A very simplistic argument, and not correct.

“Saying yes or not caring will cause them to lose interest either immediately or after the first few attempts”

Yep, that certainly works with alcohol…Wait – no it doesn’t.

“Saying no is what makes them want it more.”

Bollocks.
Example: Being told I shouldn’t drink when underage didn’t make me want it more. In fact, had the legal drinking age been lowered to 15 or 16, you can bet my drinking would’ve increased significantly.

The appeal of smoking drugs when I was in high school wasn’t because it was illegal (“saying no”) – that wasn’t even a part of my though process. If anything, I would’ve been less apprehensive about using cannabis (especially the first time) had it been legal.

Typically people under 18 will want to do something more if they are told they can’t do it.

The only people (#21 Tooks) who think decriminalising/legalising something will make children want to use more clearly either aren’t parents or aren’t very successful parents. Saying no is what makes them want it more. Saying yes or not caring will cause them to lose interest either immediately or after the first few attempts.

Requiring them to line up in a pharmacy with the sick and the elderly and other users would probably decrease drug use. The current dealers would be put out of business as even taxed the pharmacies would undercut them significantly. That would remove the thrill of buying them covertly. The thrill of using them would be lessened as well, not least of which because the bragging rights will wither away and die as availability becomes commonplace.

Pommy bastard brings up some good points (esp in #20). My main concern about legalising cannabis is that I believe its use would rise significantly, especially among young people (under 18s). I’ve seen way too many people suffer from long term effects of smoking the stuff to believe it’s a harmless, or mostly harmless drug. I’m not only talking about mental illness here, but changes in personality over time, lack of focus, lack of motivation etc.

Also, a black market of sorts would still exist, because presumably the legal sale of the drug would be limited to those who are 18 and over.

Remember, it’s already decriminalised in the ACT, so unless your growing pounds of the stuff, or dealing it, you have little to worry about if you’re smoking it in your own home.

Spideydog said :

I see what you are saying however, with increased use I see increased strain on the already shambles mental health system….

Reasonable point, but seeing as 70% of the people who come to the attention of mental health services have used drugs of one form or another in the past month, I don’t think there will be a huge increase.

There is an argument to be made that people with mental health problems look to drugs, esp cannabis, to self medicate befoire seeking psychiatric help.

Again, seeing as prohibition has markedly failed since its inception, and is failing more and more as the years pass, what is the advantage of criminalisng drug users?

Why waste the time and money of police, courts, legal sectors, health and social services, prosecuting Joe Soap, who has the cannabis equivalent of one midi of beer in his pocket, and has harmed no one?

Money saved could be plowed into heath awareness campaigns. This would have two main effects;

1) People would be better informed so as to make choices. (If they chose to use, then they cannot deny they were aware of potential risks.)
2) Anyone experiencing possible mental health problems following drug use would be more likely to seek help, as the stigma of criminalisation would be removed. (The earlier the metal health intervention starts, the more efficacious it is.)

Spideydog said :

Just have a look at the effect alcohol has on Policing/health system and the community as a whole, do we want to add to this by allowing open uninhibited drug use ???

Where would the increase come from? Do you really think legalising drugs would make those current users, who enjoy their spliff or whatever, go out and commit crime. Over 30% of the Australian public has tried drugs of one form or another during their life. Are the other 70% just criminals waiting for the excuse of getting their hands on legal drugs? (Or are they the sort of people who wouldn’t touch drugs with a barge pole if they were legal or not?)

The main problem with the criminalisation of drugs, is that it CREATES criminals, most of whom are responsible for “victimless crimes.”

Spideydog said :

People that say that Cannabis, ecstasy or LSD use is safer than “table salt” is deluding themselves.

Agreed.

vandam said :

Pommy bastard said :

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

Whoa……hang on there on the less police time wasted.

Since we’re comparing alcohol with cannabis, look at how much time and Police resources are spent dealing with people under the influence of alcohol. Drunken behaviour/fights/domestic violence/murders/sexual assaults/property damage/drink driving.

It’s not as simple as just taxing it. Think about the bigger picture. Whilst under the influence of the drug, Police are still going to have to deal with the above situations, only on a much bigger scale because, naturally once you legalise something, everyone wants to try it.

Simply, take our current alcohol problems/issues and double it with the legalisation of Cannabis. Do we want that sort of society?

That is such a ridiculously weak and ignorant argument I don’t even know where to start. On the other hand, a decent trolling effort.

vandam said :

Pommy bastard said :

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

Whoa……hang on there on the less police time wasted.

Since we’re comparing alcohol with cannabis, look at how much time and Police resources are spent dealing with people under the influence of alcohol. Drunken behaviour/fights/domestic violence/murders/sexual assaults/property damage/drink driving.

It’s not as simple as just taxing it. Think about the bigger picture. Whilst under the influence of the drug, Police are still going to have to deal with the above situations, only on a much bigger scale because, naturally once you legalise something, everyone wants to try it.

Simply, take our current alcohol problems/issues and double it with the legalisation of Cannabis. Do we want that sort of society?

Exactly, get rid of one problem (Police efforts to minimise drug use and/or proliferation in the community) to have another rise and take it’s place (behaviour and health problems of more people on drugs), except the ramifications are far worse in my opinion.

Pommy bastard said :

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

Whoa……hang on there on the less police time wasted.

Since we’re comparing alcohol with cannabis, look at how much time and Police resources are spent dealing with people under the influence of alcohol. Drunken behaviour/fights/domestic violence/murders/sexual assaults/property damage/drink driving.

It’s not as simple as just taxing it. Think about the bigger picture. Whilst under the influence of the drug, Police are still going to have to deal with the above situations, only on a much bigger scale because, naturally once you legalise something, everyone wants to try it.

Simply, take our current alcohol problems/issues and double it with the legalisation of Cannabis. Do we want that sort of society?

Pommy bastard said :

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

Fair enough. I’ve never had anything to do with it, and don’t know much about it. The question was serious – thanks for the response.

so, which way you gone vote, loubird??

Pommy bastard said :

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

I see what you are saying however, with increased use I see increased strain on the already shambles mental health system…. which in turn puts the same but opposite pressure back on the Police and health system who have to deal with the fallout of drug use and abuse … psychosis and the behaviour of people whilst under the influence of these drugs, not including the health issues that arise. Just have a look at the effect alcohol has on Policing/health system and the community as a whole, do we want to add to this by allowing open uninhibited drug use ???

People that say that Cannabis, ecstasy or LSD use is safer than “table salt” is deluding themselves.

The fact that marijuana is illegal is the biggest running joke in civilised society today.

Prohibition is an expensive and largely pointless exercise.

If you don’t like drugs, don’t use them, but you shouldn’t have the right to tell other people what they can and can’t do in their own homes.

georgesgenitals said :

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

Less police time wasted, fewer otherwise law abiding people criminalised, less money in the hands of drug dealers, less turf wars over dealings, less court time wated, less legal burden on the state, more happy people.

In fact, I cannot think of a positive for the current situation.

Why legalise it? What’s the benefit – other than possible taxation?

GregW said :

I would not call it a huge risk, it was only a few years ago that any statistically significant effect was shown at all.

Wrong I’m afraid, to a person with a predisposition to psychosis, cannabis proves huge risk.

Use of Cannabis can cause a condition called drug-induced psychosis. This usually passes after a few days. However, if someone has a predisposition to a psychotic illness such as schizophrenia, cannabis may trigger the first episode of an ongoing condition such as schizophrenia. There is increasing evidence that regular cannabis use precedes and even causes higher rates of psychotic illness. At the same time, many people with schizophrenia have not used cannabis.

http://www.sane.org/information/factsheets-podcasts/547-cannabis-and-psychotic-illness

Pommy bastard said :

Well, davesact, that situation, differs as they are two different substances with different effects on different people, and have different legal status.

Having said all that, if I had said they were in any way comparable, such as legally, in medical effect, or in their epidemiology, you may have a point. If I had made a comparison, or stated that the legal or moral status of one was in someway indicative of or analogous to, or in some way reflected or effected the status of the other, there may be some point of contention here

But as it is you’re just blowing smoke out of you posterior over something which has nothing whatsoever to do with my post.

Apologies for the wind, when you made reference to psychosis it evoked a thought…

Well, davesact, that situation, differs as they are two different substances with different effects on different people, and have different legal status.

Having said all that, if I had said they were in any way comparable, such as legally, in medical effect, or in their epidemiology, you may have a point. If I had made a comparison, or stated that the legal or moral status of one was in someway indicative of or analogous to, or in some way reflected or effected the status of the other, there may be some point of contention here

But as it is you’re just blowing smoke out of you posterior over something which has nothing whatsoever to do with my post.

Pommy bastard said :

Despite it creating a huge risk for those with a predisposition to psychosis

I would not call it a huge risk, it was only a few years ago that any statistically significant effect was shown at all.

From a physiological point of view alcohol, tobacco, paracetamol, heck even table salt are far more dangerous than cannabis, ecstasy or LSD.

Cannabis will never be legalised in the ACT until the constitution is changed to prevent federal government interference, and even then it is unlikely. The reason for this is that Australia has signed up to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs which requires signatories to make supply and possession illegal.

International treaties only need the support of politicians, not science.

“How should that differ to Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome with inappropriate alcohol injestion?”

Well, spelling for starters

I meant ingestion.

Pommy bastard said :

“Despite it creating a huge risk for those with a predisposition to psychosis,”

How should that differ to Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome with inappropriate alcohol injestion?.. a legal drug.

Pommy bastard said :

Despite it creating a huge risk for those with a predisposition to psychosis, I would prefer it to be legal (and taxed). If only a small percentage of the $$$$ wasted on enforcing its criminalisation was spent on good drug education and health services, we’d be a far better off society.

Agreed. Alcohol and Tobacco are far more harmful and dangerous substances that are already perfectly legal, it doesn’t make a whole lot sense to waste resources on stopping people from using it.

Despite it creating a huge risk for those with a predisposition to psychosis, I would prefer it to be legal (and taxed). If only a small percentage of the $$$$ wasted on enforcing its criminalisation was spent on good drug education and health services, we’d be a far better off society.