http://news.aol.co.uk/cannabis-upgraded-to-class-b-drug/article/20080507081909990003

well this is what happens when people arent active in favour of de-criminalisation .

why dont they criminalise alcohol ? surely there is more evidence that that does harm ?

bollocks. legalise it! wish i was old enough to actually have any kind of say in politics.

bummer man, bummer.

though there is plenty more evidence for the harmful effects of alcohol, there's not a cat in Hell's chance of alcohol being criminalised in the current political climate. Maybe Jacqui Smith is trying to appeal to the Daily Mail readers after Labour's drubbing in the local elections.

i was just about to write a post about this, came across the report on directgov. here it is if anyone's interested:

Cannabis will be reclassified as a Class B drug, sending a strong message that the drug is harmful and should not be taken, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced today. Cannabis use has fallen significantly across all age ranges and this is a testament to the success of the previous ten year Drug Strategy. However, the reduction in cannabis use must not be allowed to reverse.

Reclassification reflects the fact that skunk, a much stronger type of the drug, now dominates the cannabis market. It accounts for 81 per cent of cannabis available on our streets compared to just 30 per cent in 2002. The average age of first use is 13 years old and young people may binge on skunk in the same way as alcohol, trying to achieve the maximum effect. If they do, the independent Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs found that the consequences of this "may be serious to their mental health".


Reclassification

Taking effect from early 2009, the reclassification will mean:


more robust enforcement against cannabis supply and possession, and those repeatedly caught with the drug will not just receive cannabis warnings
a new strategic and targeted approach to tackling cannabis farms and the organised criminals behind them
introducing additional aggravating sentencing factors for those caught supplying cannabis and other illegal substances near further and higher educational establishments, mental health institutions and prisons
working with the Association of Chief Police Officers to look at how existing legislation and powers can be used to curtail the sale and promotion of cannabis paraphernalia
updating and refreshing our public information messages on the harm caused by cannabis.
The Home Secretary has asked the Association of Chief Police Officers, working with the Police Federation, the Superintendents Association and Criminal Justice Partners, to propose more robust enforcement measures for policing cannabis as a Class B drug. This will make clear that penalties for adults must be escalated following any cannabis warning and that police officers will not be precluded from arresting for a first offence.


Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said:

"Cannabis is and always has been illegal. It now dominates the illegal drugs market in the UK and is stronger than ever before.

"There is accumulating evidence, reflected in the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs report, showing that the use of stronger cannabis may increase the harm to mental health. Some young people may be 'binge smoking' to achieve maximum possible intoxication which may be very serious to their mental health."

I doubt it'll make much difference. People smoked it before downgrading, people smoked it after, people will continue to smoke it now. It's still illegal either way and the change in the letter after the name will deter no one....

I assume she has stakes in the market then, the only thing that alters is the price.

Already posted this but meh :P . Yeah, bloody ridiculous to be honest. Though the daily mail plan backfired, because they still managed to criticise labour over it, mainly because they completely ignored the advisory committee and the police. Still, as Peace_Phoenix said, harsher sentences don't deter people at all. Just ends up with more money in the dealers pockets.

I was talking about this the other night with a few friends. At the end of the day nothing will change, except as has been said the dealers will have a bit more cash in their pockets. People will do drugs reguardless of the laws and the best way to keep people safe is often just to make it legal, look at America in the time of Prohibition.

It's just something for politics to debate about while everyone else gets high. It doesn't make much difference, beside the technicalites of the law.

yea it wont make a difference i think the smart thingto do is copy our neigbours holland

I was freaking out when i saw this.. then i realized this was the UK forum.. lol :)

lol

This means, if you deal, you will face 14 years imprisonment.

They pretty much never exact the maximum penalties for these sorts of things. You might get that if you were a major importer....

good job they have the space in prisons to lock up all these 'organised criminals'

good job they have the space in prisons to lock up all these 'organised criminals'Yeah, god, I mean imagine if they were running out of space in prisons....

I was watching a news article about this the other night. Its obviously been a 'another pointless ill thought out ideas week' for the goverment. The article on the BBC said that the use of cannabis has fallen since 2003, so i'm wondering where the logic comes in to upgrading a drug that the number of its users are falling, if the usage of cannabis was rising i might see some sense in trying to put people off by longer prison stretches but i don't see it as an idea with any great weight or conviction to it. Like everyones said it won't put of people from smoking so maybe the goverment should concentrate on trying to get the country back in to some sort of order instead of wasting there and everyone elses time with pointless reclassifications of drugs.

sorry for the rant but i lost any small amount of faith i had with the goverment the day i found i was 11 pounds worse of a month when earning a pittance as it is!! socialists, what????

The thing is people are getting criminal convictions and going to jail .

The people who say well it wont change anything people will still smoke dope are right but other people will get involved in the court system they will have lifelong criminal records (which may effect their future employment ,or could stop them from living in another country).

The fact that marijuana is illegal encourages gangsterism , it gets people involved with drug dealing and dealers .
I suppose this doesnt matter to the government as they are the main people behind importing illegal drugs .

i agree jonny. often lots of usually law obiding people who would not usually mix with gangs and dealers have to become involved in that if they want to have a smoke because the goverment are now pushing them down that route. and its like bass sic above says, no wonder there are overcrowded prisons. Holland have the right idea. and also i agree with your first post and have the debate quite often with my sister that surely all signs point to alcohol being a much more dangerous drug, examples of which are for all to see every weekend, but still thats a nice taxable revenue for the goverment.

I suppose this doesnt matter to the government as they are the main people behind importing illegal drugs .Evidence?:tongue:

I don't go with the conspiracy version, it's just a decision based on cultural and political factors. Brown is chasing votes ... popular opinion is going more conservative, and the Labour party is following it. Sounding tough on what is perceived to be a public danger, in their calculation, will win them votes. The facts of the matter (that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol, that we would all be better off if it were legalised and properly regulated, not to say taxed) are irrelevant.

i searched got last friday. hadnt picked up yet so i survived. how am i gonna manage on my allowance??? shit man...

Evidence?:tongue:I think Alex Jones told him so....

What is wrong with cannabis anyway? Surely it does no more harm than alchohol or ordinary tobacco? I reckon the police seize the stuff, then sell it back to Holland for a higher price and the government reap all the money.

There are many who smoke weed openly. I feel safe with someone smoking a spliff than someone sharpening a rusty chainsaw. I reckon the whole hype about how cannabis is worse than crack is just baloney.

Additional: God created Hemp. God didn't say, "Don't touch the Hemp".
How much is it for half ounce of cannabis(Just the seeds)? Where can I buy in Camden>?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7400376.stm

Hilarious..

well, don't smoke it as i find it boring and am pretty buzzd naturally... having said that, i don't see why an adult over 18 or 21 or whatever, can't make up their own bloody mind!

It's a fucking sad state of society when the government resort to trying to up their figures by making drivers (speed cameras) and peeps who prefer blow (or any other drug to alcohol) criminals...

well done! you cant catch the real fuck ups (rapists, murderers etc) so why not give a criminal record to us normal moral folk who just happen to like to smoke weed rather than drink a martini at the "club" or drive home a bit fast meh

Well at least it ups their figures for the fight against crime eh??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz-F4D6BzNg


I found this quite interesting. It suggests that politicians are more often than not hippocrites. Just goes to show how we shouldn't take anything New Labour tells us about Cannabis. I believe Cherie Blair has had a few puffs of the dragon. No wonder she seems out of it. Even Boris Johnson had a few spliffs here and there in his teenage years.

this is fucking ridiculous

I doubt it'll make much difference. People smoked it before downgrading, people smoked it after, people will continue to smoke it now. It's still illegal either way and the change in the letter after the name will deter no one....This seems to be pretty much the view of Chief Superintendent Paul Pearce of Brighton and Hove Police, who has been quoted in the local paper as saying that the reclassification will make no difference to how the police deal with cannabis, that the majority of drug-related crimes stem from heroin and crack cocaine addiction, that drug abuse is a social problem which the police can't tackle on their own and there should be a debate about legalisation. But between him and a Daily Mail leader, who will the government take more notice of?

The affects of cannabis are always grossly exagerated just so a few number of people can support their case against the humble leaf.

Cannabis is just as harmful as ciggerettes and alchohol.

I don't believe the effects are grossly exagerated by the authorities, though their reaction to it is. Too much strong weed smoked at a young age will more often than not affect the development of ones psyche, sense, simple common sense.

Re-classification I believe has more to do with the desire to give bigger sentences to the Factory managers, maybe perceived as a lot of money to be made with small risk.

I don't believe the effects are grossly exagerated by the authorities, though their reaction to it is. Too much strong weed smoked at a young age will more often than not affect the development of ones psyche, sense, simple common sense.

Re-classification I believe has more to do with the desire to give bigger sentences to the Factory managers, maybe perceived as a lot of money to be made with small risk.
When Pete Docherty got sent to jail, it must have been Drug Heaven. Prison has always been a way to tackle drug addiction. It is criminalised so more people go to prison. Reclassifing Cannabis means longer terms in jail but won't solve the drugs problem. I think cannabis has been dubbed almost worse than Crack. Although yes at a young age Cannabis may be more harmful, but we could say the same thing if we gave a ciggerette to a tiddlypeep.

But people can smoke a weaker form of cannabis. Not everyone smokes strong cannbis or skunk. Some just prefer to get a little high. It is like you can either choose Marlboro or Silkcut. There is always a choice, a range of strengths. OUr government are about as useful as an air conditioner on the face of the Sun, when it comes to tackling drugs.

There is a slight difference between psychoactive and non-pshycoactive drugs though if you care to consider the possibility.

The young are not interested in moderation haven't you noticed, I know not all, but a significant minority, and as to the matter of choice that's not really true. Better legalised and qualified though imo.

The government has obviously got its priorities in order...

Some drug geezer is saying that acid and ecstasy should be downgraded now.

Bout bloody time! They cause MUCH less damage (in fact acid causes NONE thats been conclusively proven) than heroin and the other drugs in Class A, so it's a bit spurious to defenc them being in that class with "But theyre bad for you OMG"

It's pointless re-classifying it, it just means that more people will get sent to jail for having it making the prisons even more full. It isn't gonna stop people from smoking it any less. Just de-criminilise it and have done, open a few hash shops at least that way they can conrol it somewhat

I guess everyone will suddenly stop taking Cannabis.:rolleyes: I think not somehow all this grading stuff, is actually like a broken pencil--Pointless.