Legalise and tax Marijuana

[j26]

Leaving aside the social issues, there is a very strong case to legalise marijuana, and apply an excise duty. Importation would of course have to be strictly controlled, and possibly use (cafes as per Amsterdam for example). Hold off on the kneejerk reactions for a second and consider;

• Government revenues would increase
• Policing costs would fall/be more effectively employed
• The courts would be less choked up with drugs cases, making for a faster dispute resolution system which could only help the business environment
• There would be increased tourism as people come here for a legal high (particularly from the UK)
• Quality could be monitored, improving safety for users
• Supply could be regulated, taking the trade from the gangs, and reducing their power on the streets
• Taking marijuana out of the criminal circle would most likely reduce the propensity to move on to other more dangerous drugs.

Unfortunately it would be political suicide, but financially it would be a good idea.


I don't smoke it btw (used to in college, but not any more)

 

[rmelly]

• Supply could be regulated

This is something you always hear when this topic is debated, but what does this actually mean?

Is the sale of alcohol and tobacco considered to be regulated? If so, has this prevented teenagers and even younger from accessing either?

 

[mercman]

Could you possibly see anything as sensible as this happening in this country ??

 

[j26]

[/list]
This is something you always hear when this topic is debated, but what does this actually mean?

To me that means the importation and delivery to retailers would be controlled in a way that alcohol and cigarettes are not.

Young people get it anyway - wouldn't it be easier to to limit supply to minors with a finite number of monitored retail outlets, than the current unregulated market?

 

[rmelly]

Yes, but my point is that alcohol and tobacco are supposedly regulated but are freely available to teens and younger.

I don't really have an opinion of the subject either way, but playing devils advocate on a few of the other points:

taking the trade from the gangs, and reducing their power on the streets

Would they not just switch to another illegal drug, probably causing turf wars & gang land killings / feuds etc as more gangs compete for a smaller market?

Policing costs would fall/be more effectively employed

I'm not familiar with the costs etc, but they would still have to prevent importation/distribution of all other illegal drugs, so I don't see much of a fall here. They'd still need to test for driving under the influence etc.

Taking marijuana out of the criminal circle would most likely reduce the propensity to move on to other more dangerous drugs.

Has it been agreed that marijuana is a 'gateway drug'? I thought that the people who favoured it's legalisation generally said it wasn't? Apologies for the generalisation there.

 

[mathepac]

The sale and supply of dangerous prescription medications is supposedly regulated (sleepers, tranquilisers, pain killers, methadone, etc) to a far greater extent than tobacco and alcohol and yet prescription meds are for sale to kids on any street corner in the country.

Before yet another dangerous drug goes on sale, there is a job to be done enforcing the regulations on existing dangerous substances.

Marijuana is not just dangerous as a "gateway drug" - that myth has been dispelled decades ago - it is a dangerous mind and mood altering drug in and of itself.

 

[j26]

... playing devils advocate on a few of the other points:

Would they not just switch to another illegal drug, probably causing turf wars & gang land killings / feuds etc as more gangs compete for a smaller market?

A huge source of revenue would be taken away. That in itself would substantially reduce their power.

I'm not familiar with the costs etc, but they would still have to prevent importation/distribution of all other illegal drugs, so I don't see much of a fall here. They'd still need to test for driving under the influence etc.

Every possession bust means the cost of arrest etc, a garda being in court to prosecute and many other costs. Yes there would have to be policing of other drugs, but the resources would be targeted more at the drugs that actually are dangerous. There are also costs associated with courts and the costs of incarceration. It should add up to a pretty penny.

Has it been agreed that marijuana is a 'gateway drug'? I thought that the people who favoured it's legalisation generally said it wasn't? Apologies for the generalisation there.

The issue I see is that your local hash dealer is also likely to carry quite an array of other substances, and offer them on occasion to the buyer. If you're a criminal for using hash, why not try another drug? Separate marijuana from that environment and you reduce the temptation to try other drugs, and prevent the 'Buy one get one free' offers that might move people on to other drugs.

 

[z103]

it is a dangerous mind and mood altering drug in and of itself.

How is it dangerous? Well apart from the obvious damage that can also be associated with cigarettes and alcohol. I would say it's less harmful than cigarettes because less is consumed.

Anyway, 'Party XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX', containing BZP are legal in Ireland and Canada (for the moment). They are really nasty. If you get offered these, please avoid. Much worse than spamspamspam.

 

[mathepac]

... I would say it's less harmful than cigarettes because less is consumed...

I assume you make that statement as a mental health professional or somone who has access to the extensive research results which are now available?

Or is your post made from a position of ignorance of the real dangers of the substance concerned?

... Anyway, 'Party XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX', containing BZP are legal in Ireland and Canada (for the moment). They are really nasty. If you get offered these, please avoid. Much worse than spamspamspam.

Again I assume you have some scientific basis for comparing the effects of the two drugs which enables you to conclude that one is "much worse" than the other.

BTW, that is not to say that I regard either as benign, any more than I regard the effects of alcohol or tobacco as benign.

 

[z103]

I assume you make that statement as a mental health professional or somone who has access to the extensive research results which are now available?

Or is your post made from a position of ignorance of the real dangers of the substance concerned?

Why do you make such assumptions?

I didn't think anyone had actually died from spamspamspam. Maybe the method of consumption eg, emphysema or lung cancer etc. could cause deaths. Such an experiment is notoriously difficult because of confounding factors ie, spamspamspam users are often also tobacco smokers.

Again I assume you have some scientific basis for comparing the effects of the two drugs which enables you to conclude that one is "much worse" than the other.

Yes, imperical evidence, I've tried both and BZP is terrible stuff. The 'hangover' lasted three days from a single 100mg dose.

 

[Caveat]

A bit Daily Mail, but re the 'gateway drug', whilst not all spamspamspam users become heroin users, you'll probably find that 90 odd % of heroin users started on spamspamspam.

 

[z103]

Caveat - I'd say 99% of alcoholics probably started on milk.
Are you suggesting that there's something in spamspamspam that'll make people want to take heroin?

 

[Caveat]

Are you suggesting that there's something in spamspamspam that'll make people want to take heroin?

Not in the sense of a component or active ingredient, but in the sense of the suggestion or promise of a possibly better, more potent way to be 'out of it', well, yes.

And milk does not have any psychoactive properties - and is legal of course.

 

[NorthDrum]

Interesting topic.

People with medical conditions that may get pain relief from this drug should be allowed access to it.

I think it’s hypocritical to talk about the effects of spamspamspam while conveniently dismissing the long term effects of smoking or drinking alcohol. People can get hooked on sleeping XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, glue or paracetamol but they are widely available.

I think people get caught up on the whole "illegal" issue here and find it difficult to justify legalising what is in essence just another drug that would be made available to the public.

Imagine alcohol was banned, do you think the drug dealers would perhaps go into selling illegal liquor! this would increase their client base and their profits.

I think its a sound argument to say that legalising spamspamspam would take revenues off Drug pushers and possibly takeaway the whole "gateway to heroin" route as you would never need to meet a drug dealer.

I wouldn’t be totally convinced that anything should be done on this matter, but it is an interesting idea. Those who have dismissed it haven’t really thought it through when considering what is already legal in this country.

I personally don’t think cigarettes should be legal, but think that its hard to argue that spamspamspam is any more dangerous to humans on a wide scale basis.

Can anybody (particularly the no campaigners) provide stats or information that in Holland its had a huge negative effect or that the Dutch are all a bunch of stoners? If the answer is yes, or that the drug dealers have somehow benefited, then no discussions are needed, but if the answer is no then I think the OP is onto something.

 

[DavyJones]

I think it should be made legal. As an ex smoker, I can safely say it had no lasting damage to my mental health.
I know quite a few people who smoke on a regular basis and would never dream of taking class A. So this talk of a gate way drug is unfounded in my experiance, as in most people of my age would have been ravers at some point and now have families and good jobs etc and it was all part of growing up in modern Ireland.

Smoking weed/hash, whatever, is massive business in this country and you would be surprised by the people who actually indulge.

The only problem I could see is the price would sky rocket if controlled and people would still probably buy it on the black market to avoid VAT etc.

 

[Caveat]

I'm not convinced at all as to the 'harmlessness' of spamspamspam.

A lot is made of this when making comparisons with other drugs but that doesn't mean that spamspamspam should be treated lightly.

Less harmful than class A drugs? certainly. Less harmful than alcohol? probably, but I definitely do not take the view that it is harmless - and I speak from experience.

 

[DavyJones]

I'm not convinced at all as to the 'harmlessness' of spamspamspam.
.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you there. It would be better not to take any drugs, legal or otherwise.

However I belive if you have mental health issues, taking drugs/drinking might bring it to the fore quicker than if you didn't take mind altering substances.

 

[michaelm]

Marijuana is not just dangerous as a "gateway drug" - that myth has been dispelled decades ago - it is a dangerous mind and mood altering drug in and of itself.

I'd tend to agree with this and therefore would oppose legalisation; also I think we should not be addicting people to methadone, as is the current practice.

 

[Pique318]

Something that can grow in the wild, should never be illegal.

The magic mushrooms thing recently is ridiculous....I know of cattle that should be locked up as a result of that law !

Synthetic drugs are the major problem in modern society. Heroin, Cocaine, Meth. Alcohol and tobacco come next but Weed is at the bottom of the list IMO.

How many stoners do you see punching the heads off each other ? And no-one is spouting about the mental damage that booze causes.

Personally, I'd prefer to have a spliff instead of few beers, but I'd potentially be arrested or lose my job if caught. It's a bloody joke.

Reefer Madness is still strong in this country, with the majority of people still classing it as 'drugs' exactly like Smack. Ignorance is always prevalent in Ireland when it comes to liberal ideas, and this is no different.

 

[Caveat]

Something that can grow in the wild, should never be illegal.

Opium? mescaline? salvia divinorum?

There are plenty probably. I think there should be a public safety concern too, regardless if something is 'natural'.