[Redway]

I thought it was common knowledge that people should be allowed to do what they want with their lives so long as it doesn't bother you without fear of imprisonment. Don't go dictating someone's life for them and telling them what you think is OK for them to do.

It's as simple as that. I don't need any substantiation or statistics to make that statement.

As for cannabis, not only does all that apply here, but there are tons of statistics that prove why it should be legalised. This discussion has been done to death with you and plenty of people have posted evidence to support these claims but it seems you just ignore them or even if you do concede them try and twist them to fit your own opinion.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Your long detailed argument is nothing more than pro drugs diatribe, it has no supporting material, statistics or evidence.
There is no disrespect, after all it's a matter of opinion. And that's all I see here your opinion, it has no basis in fact.

Which segments of my arguments are troubling you? I would be more than happy to provide links to studies, news reports and any other manner of evidence since my arguments to you are clearly the bitter rantings of some sort of insane stoner who is making things up as he goes along. That the decriminalization and or legalization of certain drugs is a farcical pipe dream that isn't actually being debated by people of importance. That there is nothing to discuss. That we can cover it up and all move along. For the kids. The idea that illegality exacerbates the dangers of drugs and puts them in an unsafe environment is something that I've conjured up of my own free will. It has no structured basis in reality. Clearly.

Here is one of the long posts to refresh your memory, troubled mummy :

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by Stu

No, they are not. They were banned for poor medical reasoning and out of a knee jerk reaction to fresh experiences of the mind that were misunderstood or wrongly perceived to be horrifying. They continue to remain illegal because it has built up in to a sturdy zeitgeist that no politician want to step out from the shadows to break. Politicians are typically weak people.

If medical reasoning mattered at all then the American government would have listened to Judge Francis Young - a DEA man - in 1988 when he declared Cannabis to be one of the safest therapeutic substances known to man.

If medical reasoning mattered the British government would have listened to Professor David Nutt - the then chair of the governments own Advisory Committee on Misuse of Drugs - when he declared Ecstasy to be safer than hose riding and when he repeatedly called for a relaxing of soft drug laws. Cannabis is currently ranked to be of equal danger to base amphetamines in British drug legislation. That is not scientific. That's science and policy on it's knees in the mud.

If medical reasoning mattered Professor Nutt would not have been unceremoniously sacked from his position. Governments would take their scientific advice first hand from unbiased scientific bodies when dictating drug laws and not from pressure groups with vested interests because the woman outside with the placard had a son who knocked back too many pills on top of a crate of alcohol and went sick then dead.

Medical reasoning does not matter.


Why are you using the word 'will'? Chances are Cannabis won't cause you long term health problems at all. Are you being facetious for the sake of it because you personally don't like an altered mind and prefer to stay in and check out a good old execution instead?

I have talked at length on this forum for a number of years now about the emerging trend of demonizing the mental state of Cannabis intoxication and it's purported effects on mental health. I was engaged in debate on topics like the ratio of cannabinoids in the make up of the plant years before the papers caught up with it [some still haven't].

The practical invention and mystical attributes given to "skunk weed" have created this weird sort of fantasy land for journalists who now have carte blanche to hanker back to the days of Reefer Madness and talk about smoking pot as if it's a trip down the rabbit hole with undertones of demonic possession.

Some are only coming around to and respecting the fact now that these mental health effects are not only blown out of proportion but are symptoms of the illegal environment the plant inhabits. It's not the strength per say of Cannabis that is sometimes dangerous but the exact chemical make up of the plant. It's easier to just say it's stronger and scarier than ever, I know.

The trend towards indoor grows where Cannabis is cultivated guerrilla style hard and fast in an ultra artificial environment by crime gangs who don't respect the product has resulted in THC enriched Cannabis that has all but had the CBD bred out of it. CBD is Cannabidiol. It's the true magic of Cannabis that is only coming to light in recent times.

Cannabidiol and other Cannabinoids like it in the Cannabis plant [if you ever want to flex your keyboard fingers in a improvisational groove band feel free to use that as a name, man] play a huge, very important role in mediating the effects of THC [tetrahydrocannabinol, the stuff that gets you groovy]. They round out the intoxication of Cannabis, infuse it with it's medical properties and protect against THC giving the brain too much of a kicking.

Cannabidiol is an anti psychotic, anti anxiety agent. It has all but been bred out of most commercial strains of the ganj because of the illegal marketplace it exists in. Because of the zeitgeist of cowardice and anti science that you support.

So it's not just a question of strength. I'm regularly getting great hash that is far stronger than most of the mass market variations of haze and cheese that are smoking up the marketplace on this side of the pond but it's infinitely relaxing.

So in essence this mental health scare is an overreaction to a market trend created and preserved by Cannabis's illegality in the first place. And that is without me even going into sprayed and contaminated Cannabis.


Of course it wasn't rhetorical. I was pretty passionate in my insistence that you grace me with an answer regardless of the hypothetical nature of it. You could be brave and just do that.

One would assume you would support a similar system of judicial catastrophe on British shores. I would like to know as an honest, up front recreational drug user who has had drugs in his back pocket before where I would stand and what punishment would befit me had I ever been caught.

Heck I grew three plants on my windowsill once. Surely I should be eligible for a Sunday matinee execution to brighten your day up?

This is all only if you're interested in this particular debate, mind you. Like you have pointed out multiple times if you would rather this topic stick to the realms of the news story then that's fine too. But you have this peculiar habit of ... well ... you know.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Stu

Which segments of my arguments are troubling you? I would be more than happy to provide links to studies, news reports and any other manner of evidence since my arguments to you are clearly the bitter rantings of some sort of insane stoner who is making things up as he goes along. That the decriminalization and or legalization of certain drugs is a farcical pipe dream that isn't actually being debated by people of importance. That there is nothing to discuss. That we can cover it up and all move along. For the kids. The idea that illegality exacerbates the dangers of drugs and puts them in an unsafe environment is something that I've conjured up of my own free will. It has no structured basis in reality. Clearly.

Here is one of the long posts to refresh your memory, troubled mummy :



This is all only if you're interested in this particular debate, mind you. Like you have pointed out multiple times if you would rather this topic stick to the realms of the news story then that's fine too. But you have this peculiar habit of ... well ... you know.

No your opinion is not troubling me, as that's all it is...your opinion and not worth anymore or any less than anyone elses opinion stu.
If you wish to, I would be happy to read them.
Yes it is something you've conjoured up as you have no proof to the contrary that decriminalisation will make drugs safer.

I'm not troubled stu, not at all.
I have a habit of what?...Wanting to see reputable facts, countering dubious opinion...

[Stu]

I will use the Portuguese model as my primary example :

Drug Decriminalization in Portugal
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...on-policy-pays
https://econ.berkeley.edu/sites/defa...lon_daniel.pdf
http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...893946,00.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...riminalization
http://metronews.ca/news/world/39317...-war-on-drugs/
http://www.businessinsider.com/portu...n-works-2012-7
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/n...rtugal-addicts
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...f-in-portugal/
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.or...izing-drug-use
http://www.idt.pt/PT/IDT/Documents/P...onalReport.pdf
http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/bib...n_211672_1.pdf
http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/bib...n_211621_1.pdf


In short the system resulted in an increased uptake of drug treatment, a reduction in new HIV diagnoses amongst drug users by 17%, reduction in drug related deaths, a decrease in drug use amongst teenagers and a decrease in drugs related criminal justice efforts - freeing up time, money and resource to chase down bigger and badder apples.

This is a credible strategy to propose. The idea that it's the dubious opinion of some nutter on the internet is entirely reckless on your part. I'll say it again : if this is good enough to be an open debate that exists everywhere from Hollywood to parliament what right do you have to question the validity of it? I'm not asking if you agree with it - you're fine to disagree with it - but to not even give it due credit as a proposal is bordering on insanity.

Now moving on to other efforts. The purpose of this being to establish the feasibility of the idea and how it is happening in the real world. Because sometimes you sound like this is something that is only happening in my head :

Czech Republic
http://www.praguepost.com/news/3194-...t-liberal.html
http://www.prague-guide.co.uk/news/2...-republic.html
http://www.dw.de/liberal-drug-laws-i...east/a-5815996
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/c...marijuana-laws
http://www.expats.cz/prague/article/...c-s-drug-laws/

Reform in the United Kingdom
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ugs-law-reform
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ion-drugs-laws
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20720122
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-8421157.html
http://www.csdp.org/news/news/ukupdate.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-drugs-science
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ohnstone-drugs
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...drugs-40-years
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8336635.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8336884.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8342454.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8353685.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8455642.stm

Many other European countries such as Spain have legalized personal use of Cannabis. The movements to legalize Cannabis in the United States and Canada are well documented and I would hope I do not need to link to it. In Canada it's effectively decriminalized whilst roughly half of America have it legalized for medicinal use. Two states so far - Colorado and Washington - have now outright legalized it for personal use with more states to follow. Because the state governments realized prohibition was counter active and was never going to work. And because the people spoke and voted it in.

Now moving on to CBD. This is more Cannabis heavy material as I have already covered decriminalization in general. But it is highly important in providing an antidote to this "Cannabis makes you insane" line. I'm going to be lazy again and copy and paste as background. To this end I said :

I have talked at length on this forum for a number of years now about the emerging trend of demonizing the mental state of Cannabis intoxication and it's purported effects on mental health. I was engaged in debate on topics like the ratio of cannabinoids in the make up of the plant years before the papers caught up with it [some still haven't].

The practical invention and mystical attributes given to "skunk weed" have created this weird sort of fantasy land for journalists who now have carte blanche to hanker back to the days of Reefer Madness and talk about smoking pot as if it's a trip down the rabbit hole with undertones of demonic possession.

Some are only coming around to and respecting the fact now that these mental health effects are not only blown out of proportion but are symptoms of the illegal environment the plant inhabits. It's not the strength per say of Cannabis that is sometimes dangerous but the exact chemical make up of the plant. It's easier to just say it's stronger and scarier than ever, I know.

The trend towards indoor grows where Cannabis is cultivated guerrilla style hard and fast in an ultra artificial environment by crime gangs who don't respect the product has resulted in THC enriched Cannabis that has all but had the CBD bred out of it. CBD is Cannabidiol. It's the true magic of Cannabis that is only coming to light in recent times.

Cannabidiol and other Cannabinoids like it in the Cannabis plant [if you ever want to flex your keyboard fingers in a improvisational groove band feel free to use that as a name, man] play a huge, very important role in mediating the effects of THC [tetrahydrocannabinol, the stuff that gets you groovy]. They round out the intoxication of Cannabis, infuse it with it's medical properties and protect against THC giving the brain too much of a kicking. Cannabidiol is an anti psychotic, anti anxiety agent. It has all but been bred out of most commercial strains of the ganj because of the illegal marketplace it exists in. Because of the zeitgeist of cowardice and anti science that you support.

So it's not just a question of strength. I'm regularly getting great hash that is far stronger than most of the mass market variations of haze and cheese that are smoking up the marketplace on this side of the pond but it's infinitely relaxing. So in essence this mental health scare is an overreaction to a market trend created and preserved by Cannabis's illegality in the first place. And that is without me even going into sprayed and contaminated Cannabis.

And here is some material to support my arguments, mixed up with other medicinal benefits of CBD :

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...C67803F.d03t02
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjmbr/v39n4/6164.pdf
http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs...07458608985678
http://www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/.../dystonic1.htm
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/6/11/2921
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/192/4/306.full
http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v2.../1300340a.html
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...91305709001166
http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v3...npp20116a.html
http://jop.sagepub.com/content/25/1/121.long
http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v3.../1300838a.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20884951

I may post more links pertaining to the more general subject of medicinal Cannabis after dinner in spoiler tags if anybody is interested but I'm not sure yet. I doubt anybody would be brave enough to question Cannabis's potential as medicine because it is medicine. I may also post more evidence supporting a system of drug decriminalization but like I said I'm not sure.

I've taken effort to ensure as many links as possible were from mainstream sites or reputable scientific sourced. You won't fine a single website contained in this post that is in any way a pro Cannabis and or drug culture website.

Enjoy.

[iRyan]

Wow, this is absolutely disgusting. Death penalty is such a backwards system.

[AnnieK]

Stu obviously something you know a hell of a lot about. Great post and interesting read

[Stu]

You convinced me I actually opened that with hello then felt slightly retarded when I had to read it again .

[Kizzy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20648276

''Portugal has not legalised drugs - but it has a system of not imposing criminal penalties on drug users who enter into special programmes designed to end their habit.''

Marjorie Wallace, the chief executive of the mental health charity Sane, expressed concern about the possible impact on cannabis use.
"If the report is to be responsible, it must take account of the specific damage that cannabis can do to the developing brain, not only as recent studies have shown inducing irreversible cognitive deterioration but in around 10% of cases triggering severe psychotic illness," she said

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport...rug_addic.html

''Drug trafficking remains a serious criminal offence: Portugal hasn't legalised drugs. But people caught with a quantity of drugs deemed for their personal use (roughly ten days' supply) are sent to a local dissuasion commission panel.
The one I attended consisted of a social worker and a legal expert and they were looking at the case of Joanna, a heroin addict. The commission has the power to issue fines - while no longer a criminal offence, possession is still prohibited in Portugal - but the user here is addicted to drugs, so a fine is ruled inapplicable. The commission encourages her to go into treatment by offering to suspend other sanctions''

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_2270789.html

Dr Manuel Pinto Coelho, President of the Association for a Drug Free Portugal, says decriminalisation has not worked
"Decriminalisation in Portugal was not a blessing. Decriminalisation didn't help us. It was decriminalisation that results like this? I don't know. It makes no sense that people say since decriminalisation drugs use fell in Portugal,"
For Dr Pinto Coelho, it shows that decriminalisation had not worked. "Kofi Annan said a very interesting thing - the eradication of drugs in our planet is a difficult task but we can go forward, we can go through it. Since decriminalisation in Portugal there was an increase in every single drug. In cannabis and cocaine and ecstasy and in HIV aids," he said.

Like I said there is never going to be a one size fits all soloution. Thankyou for the information.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20648276

''Portugal has not legalised drugs - but it has a system of not imposing criminal penalties on drug users who enter into special programmes designed to end their habit.''

Marjorie Wallace, the chief executive of the mental health charity Sane, expressed concern about the possible impact on cannabis use.
"If the report is to be responsible, it must take account of the specific damage that cannabis can do to the developing brain, not only as recent studies have shown inducing irreversible cognitive deterioration but in around 10% of cases triggering severe psychotic illness," she said

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport...rug_addic.html

''Drug trafficking remains a serious criminal offence: Portugal hasn't legalised drugs. But people caught with a quantity of drugs deemed for their personal use (roughly ten days' supply) are sent to a local dissuasion commission panel.
The one I attended consisted of a social worker and a legal expert and they were looking at the case of Joanna, a heroin addict. The commission has the power to issue fines - while no longer a criminal offence, possession is still prohibited in Portugal - but the user here is addicted to drugs, so a fine is ruled inapplicable. The commission encourages her to go into treatment by offering to suspend other sanctions''

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_2270789.html

Dr Manuel Pinto Coelho, President of the Association for a Drug Free Portugal, says decriminalisation has not worked
"Decriminalisation in Portugal was not a blessing. Decriminalisation didn't help us. It was decriminalisation that results like this? I don't know. It makes no sense that people say since decriminalisation drugs use fell in Portugal,"
For Dr Pinto Coelho, it shows that decriminalisation had not worked. "Kofi Annan said a very interesting thing - the eradication of drugs in our planet is a difficult task but we can go forward, we can go through it. Since decriminalisation in Portugal there was an increase in every single drug. In cannabis and cocaine and ecstasy and in HIV aids," he said.

Like I said there is never going to be a one size fits all soloution. Thankyou for the information.

Most of that will be down to cannabis being grown by criminals. That would be solved by taking it out of the hands of them and having the government regulate it.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Redway

Most of that will be down to cannabis being grown by criminals. That would be solved by taking it out of the hands of them and having the government regulate it.

Most of what... you havent even read it redway have you?

[Redway]

All that stuff about psychotic illness, no?

[Kizzy]

Well I can't win can I? I provide proof and expert opinion and you choose to remain ignorant to the facts. Have it your way redway.

[Redway]

Proof and expert opinion of how much damage legal substances cause, though? Or are they somehow different?

You carry on with your ignorant, unsubstantiated opinions. Others actually look at the full picture instead of just cherry picking tired old arguments to support their bias.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Redway

Proof and expert opinion of how much damage legal substances cause, though? Or are they somehow different?

You carry on with your ignorant, unsubstantiated opinions. Others actually look at the full picture instead of just cherry picking tired old arguments to support their bias.

They are different because they are not illegal for a start, and we can't spin off on another tangent can we?
Why do you feel my opinions and those of the evidence in my post is ignorant and unsubstantiated?
The only tired argument here is yours.

[Redway]

You're inconceivably naive and ignorant on this topic. No point debating with you any further.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Redway

You're inconceivably naive and ignorant on this topic. No point debating with you any further.

Back to hurling insults I see?... not a very intelligent response redway.

[Ammi]

..I'm still working through the Portugal decriminalization links Stu...I didn't read the 37 page PDF document but I'm slowly and steadily reading all the other articles and there are some very convincing statistics so far...well done for the post and information btw...a lot of time and effort taken, I'll make sure I read it all...

..(apart from the 37 page PDF doc..)....

[Stu]

I think I am going to do the same given the weakness of the response to my post.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Stu

I think I am going to do the same given the weakness of the response to my post.

I gave you a reponse stu what do you want a dissertation?

[Kizzy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...on-eva-rausing
Sigrid Rausing argues that drug addiction should be treated as an illness, and I agree – but I don't believe prohibition is what makes drugs dangerous

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ion-drugs-laws
Don't get hysterical – we're not suggesting ministers jump on a plane, go to Lisbon and start taking cannabis. We are suggesting that they look at what is happening all over the world. What this does not make the case for, and what we're against, is legalising or decriminalising any drugs. We're very, very clear about that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20720122
"After all, this is a war, the war on drugs, in which over 2,000 people are losing their lives in Britain every year, in which one in five 11 to 15-year-olds in this country now say they're trying drugs, where young people now are telling us that it's easier to get hold of drugs than it is to get hold of alcohol or tobacco''

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...21157.htmlJack Straw insisted he did not support the decriminalisation of soft drugs, such as cannabis''

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-drugs-science
''One of our first priorities will be to review the effects of "legal highs" such as mephedrone, sometimes referred to as "miaow". Currently, it's perfectly legal to buy and use these drugs in a completely unregulated manner. Yet there are real scientific concerns about the harm they might cause

I have addressed half your UK related links here stu, there are points for and against in every one.
There has to be a balance.
Surely nobody would have suggested that cannabis wasn't medicinally beneficial in it's natural state?

[Stu]

I'm confused by what you're doing here. In cherry picking certain links and copy and pasting certain quotes you're actually inadvertently just clarifying and supporting my own views that the war on drugs is not working.

In addition to that, why wouldn't there be points for and against? Like I already said the purpose of providing those specific links were to highlight how there is a movement to reform drug law, that it is a feasible idea that people of importance are discussing and that it's not a pseudo science based, unsubstantiated dubious prospect. The exact words you applied to my arguments. And I've achieved just that in posting the links that I did.

Furthermore, when did I say that there shouldn't be a balance? Of course there should be. And that balance is not the war on drugs. It's not the failed effort that you continue to staunchly support. Balance is a fair and rational system that aims to protect people as much as possible from the harms of drugs and to help those who have fallen prey to them but likewise to not piss away billions annually and waste the time and effort of law enforcement in locking up responsible recreational drug users in some weird effort to make the problem just go away.

Prohibition does not work. It is an afront to civil liberties and freedom of conscious.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Stu

I'm confused by what you're doing here. In cherry picking certain links and copy and pasting certain quotes you're actually inadvertently just clarifying and supporting my own views that the war on drugs is not working.

In addition to that, why wouldn't there be points for and against? Like I already said the purpose of providing those specific links were to highlight how there is a movement to reform drug law, that it is a feasible idea that people of importance are discussing and that it's not a pseudo science based, unsubstantiated dubious prospect. The exact words you applied to my arguments. And I've achieved just that in posting the links that I did.

Furthermore, when did I say that there shouldn't be a balance? Of course there should be. And that balance is not the war on drugs. It's not the failed effort that you continue to staunchly support. Balance is a fair and rational system that aims to protect people as much as possible from the harms of drugs and to help those who have fallen prey to them but likewise to not piss away billions annually and waste the time and effort of law enforcement in locking up responsible recreational drug users in some weird effort to make the problem just go away.

Prohibition does not work. It is an afront to civil liberties and freedom of conscious.

There are links provided by you stu, and in everyone it is made crystal clear there will never be a shift towards decriminalisation.
You have no idea what I staunchly support... do you?
What this boils down to is the fact some feel they are restricted from doing what they want...like the lady in the OP..but there are restrictions , some social and some legal. There has been for millenia and will continue to be...

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There are links provided by you stu, and in everyone it is made crystal clear there will never be a shift towards decriminalisation

And? Of course high ranking politicians are largely going to denounce calls for it. Change is still inevitable. It's a question of when, not if.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You have no idea what I staunchly support... do you?

I'm going to go absolutely nuts here and assume you support drugs remaining illegal for recreational use.

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What this boils down to is the fact some feel they are restricted from doing what they want...like the lady in the OP..but there are restrictions , some social and some legal. There has been for millenia and will continue to be...

Millenia? No. Not with this. Prohibition is a relatively young concept. Cannabis and other drugs were perfectly legal for thousands of years. Do your homework.

Continue to be? Again, no. Prohibition will not last. It never does. The trend of softening drug laws is more prominent now than ever and is taking hold in certain parts of the world. It will only spread more and more. U.S. states are falling over themselves to legalize Cannabis.

And as with many things where the U.S. goes the world may follow.

[joeysteele]

The way I see things are firstly this woman shouldn't have been smuggling drugs into the Country anyway.
Furthermore, I myself and from the opinions on here few if any really think she should suffer the death penalty. Preferring a prison sentence instead for her as outlined by her original defence who asked for that and I believe that will be the outcome eventually.

She did wrong,she got caught and there is a penalty to pay for that,I however don't agree the death penalty is the right thing.

As happens with these cases however,it opens up though the debate of drugs generally and the legality or illegality of same.
Countries maybe need to look at their drugs laws and also the heavy penalties some have as to certain drugs.

I don't feel any need myself to say much more as to that as I agree with and have to applaud the posts and efforts of Stu on this subject and he has shown in my view, deep and great insight to the issue.
There is now debate in this Country too by MPs and other organisations that our drug laws are not working and that some drugs should or could be de-criminalised or relaxed and Stu has highlighted other Countries where they have a far better attitude and record with drugs than we could even hope for.

I hope that day does come,I agree with all Stu has said as to cannabis and hopefully as more countries wake up to doing something better on this issue then maybe other nations such as the one this Lady got into bother with may also follow on too.

[InOne]

The woman ****ed up in another Country and if they want to kill her that's up to them.

Not down with this 'war on drugs' nonsense though. Drugs are a part of life and people from all classes are taking them.

There is a minority who get addicted but for the most part people just have a good time.