The Australian Greens party

[Tisme]

The Greens have announced that they will build a solar powered railway line around the Australian girt.
They are currently unaware where the funds to build it will come from, but Mr Di Natale has announced that he will be planting a number of money trees in his backyard.

lol

 

[Tisme]

Greens advocating cannabis on the basis that criminal networks will be hamstrung. Sales would be through retail outlets, the product in plain packaging and trained professionals giving over the counter advice and screening.

So if the retailer won't sell guess where users will go .......

And with all these things, the ratchet principal applies i.e. ice moves down as the first order poison which the predisposed then consider a more acceptable risk.

I'm fairly sure the thrill of doing something sneaky and naughty is a significant driver in drug use and just as with group smoking on the sidewalk, the camaraderie is addictive too.

 

[SirRumpole]

Greens advocating cannabis on the basis that criminal networks will be hamstrung. Sales would be through retail outlets, the product in plain packaging and trained professionals giving over the counter advice and screening.

So if the retailer won't sell guess where users will go .......

And with all these things, the ratchet principal applies i.e. ice moves down as the first order poison which the predisposed then consider a more acceptable risk.

I'm fairly sure the thrill of doing something sneaky and naughty is a significant driver in drug use and just as with group smoking on the sidewalk, the camaraderie is addictive too.

The argument seems to be "alcohol causes more deaths and that's legal".

So we add more deaths or psychoses without doing anything about the alcohol problem.

There is a place for medical cannabis, but not general use imo.

 

[PZ99]

Let's put the Codeine back on the shelves first imo.

 

[fiftyeight]

Disappointed, I came on to ASF specifically for a laugh at your comments on this matter Tisme but you have remained relatively restrained. Incorrect but surprisingly restrained.

Lets pretend that we are the first country ever to run the experiment of legalising weed. Lets say it runs for 10 years. What variables would you (or anyone else) like to test and what would it take for you to conclude that legalising weed does have its draw backs but overall it is a net benefit to society and it should remain legal for the next 10 years

 

[Joules MM1]

Disappointed, I came on to ASF specifically for a laugh at your comments on this matter Tisme but you have remained relatively restrained. Incorrect but surprisingly restrained.

Lets pretend that we are the first country ever to run the experiment of legalising weed. Lets say it runs for 10 years. What variables would you (or anyone else) like to test and what would it take for you to conclude that legalising weed does have its draw backs but overall it is a net benefit to society and it should remain legal for the next 10 years

the only way to know this is to hold a substantial participated placebo controlled double blind study that would require a very long time period as there are already clear signs of lung disease (from smoking only) and cognitive decline and (time dependent) addiction based on long term use and the study, of course, the time period and the study themselves cannot be neutral due to the other factors that contaminate the data, hence a correct clinical study needs to be done
everything else is subjective jibberjabber


a starting point for
peer reviewed studies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4827335/

 

[Tisme]

The argument seems to be "alcohol causes more deaths and that's legal".

So we add more deaths or psychoses without doing anything about the alcohol problem.

There is a place for medical cannabis, but not general use imo.

I'm sure if they knew the downsides back then it wouldn't be legal now = grandfather clauses

 

[Tisme]

Disappointed, I came on to ASF specifically for a laugh at your comments on this matter Tisme but you have remained relatively restrained. Incorrect but surprisingly restrained.

Lets pretend that we are the first country ever to run the experiment of legalising weed. Lets say it runs for 10 years. What variables would you (or anyone else) like to test and what would it take for you to conclude that legalising weed does have its draw backs but overall it is a net benefit to society and it should remain legal for the next 10 years

You'd have to up your game if you think your opening sentence even resembles a flame.

On the basis you are close minded trolling I won't bother responding until you prove you are wearing long trousers.

I do appreciate you are trying to get a "I was thrashed by Tisme" accolades, but you need to give me more to go on, rather than made up fantastic net benefits.

 

[Tisme]

Let's put the Codeine back on the shelves first imo.

I had morphine once ..... very effective at pain relief.

 

[explod]

Greens advocating cannabis on the basis that criminal networks will be hamstrung...

...I'm fairly sure the thrill of doing something sneaky and naughty is a significant driver in drug use and just as with group smoking on the sidewalk, the camaraderie is addictive too.

On the nail Tisme. The sneaky and naughty bit in particular.

Having had 28 years working the streets I and many others in law enforcement concluded at the end of our careers that the legalisation of all drugs would serve the community much better and remove a really huge sector of criminality. This could free up resources to work on the sociological side as was done in the 90's till Kennet arrived on the scene in Victoria.

Many of the ice users today are the growing number of unemployed who see no future for themselves and therefore seek relief by switching out.

Off topic but a big cause; they say employment is up, in fact part time jobs are up, full time are down and and a person working a few hours a week at three jobs is counted to appear as three full time jobs in the stats.

 

[fiftyeight]

the only way to know this is to hold a substantial participated placebo controlled double blind study that would require a very long time period as there are already clear signs of lung disease (from smoking only) and cognitive decline and (time dependent) addiction based on long term use and the study, of course, the time period and the study themselves cannot be neutral due to the other factors that contaminate the data, hence a correct clinical study needs to be done
everything else is subjective jibberjabber


a starting point for
peer reviewed studies https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4827335/

I agree with everything said above. Weed is not harmless and does have long term side effects.

The questions I am interested in include, does the legality affect the number of weed users? Does the legality affect the number of teen users? Does the legality affect the number of users of harder drugs? Does the legality affect crime, prison numbers, net tax collected, alcohol use, car accidents attributed to THC etc...

None of the above in isolation would sway my decision but I would like to see how the experiment played out. I am of course bias, so I do come in to this thinking weed is not that bad therefore I would be in favour of a 10 or 20 year change in law with a review before making the final decision.

Note weed is not my drug of choice so the decision has little effect on me, or maybe it will and I turn in to a stoner if is so easy to access

 

[fiftyeight]

You'd have to up your game if you think your opening sentence even resembles a flame.

On the basis you are close minded trolling I won't bother responding until you prove you are wearing long trousers.

I do appreciate you are trying to get a "I was thrashed by Tisme" accolades, but you need to give me more to go on, rather than made up fantastic net benefits.

I cannot say this with out it sounding like another failed attempt at trolling, but I legit checked out ASF for the reason I out lined above. Surely someone as wise as yourself must realise that some tree hugging hippies like myself find your posts hilarious?

 

[Gringotts Bank]

I had morphine once ..... very effective at pain relief.

Re:morphine. I would wonder how many chemists or doctors would know about this. Such important research findings and yet virutally unheard of.

 

[Tisme]

Re:morphine. I would wonder how many chemists or doctors would know about this. Such important research findings and yet virutally unheard of.

I think most of us have a sense of that and why the general lack of sympathy for addicts crying foul.

Similarly there isn't much merit put in people who have smoke damage trying to put a case to smoke damage others... it's like the lunatics in charge of the asylum.

 

[Tisme]

I cannot say this with out it sounding like another failed attempt at trolling, but I legit checked out ASF for the reason I out lined above. Surely someone as wise as yourself must realise that some tree hugging hippies like myself find your posts hilarious?

Well I can either take that as meaning you have an appreciation of irony posts (something that eludes many), or you are trying to mock me; the latter being hard to take seriously when brain damage due to drug dependency is involved in the eqtn.

I'll give you the benefit of the former, coz I am not anything if I'm not empathetic.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

I think most of us have a sense of that and why the general lack of sympathy for addicts crying foul.

I think the idea of the video is that people who use, use for a reason. They are self-medicating for psychic pain (poor parenting, abuse, neglect etc). The other point was that given a good upbringing and social network, there'd be no need for it - no need in a purely chemical sense. I think it was one of the most amazing pieces of research I've ever seen, given the scourge of drug use in Australia.

 

[fiftyeight]

Well I can either take that as meaning you have an appreciation of irony posts (something that eludes many), or you are trying to mock me; the latter being hard to take seriously when brain damage due to drug dependency is involved in the eqtn.

I'll give you the benefit of the former, coz I am not anything if I'm not empathetic.

A little of column A - A little from column B



I am sure you will love a Simpsons quote.

And you are most likely correct as usual, I probably have sustained some kind of impairment due to my choice of recreational actives in my teens and early twenties. Oh well damage is done now, might as well indulge once or twice a year when I feel the urge.

Bringing it back to my original post, were there detrimental side effects due to my choice of recreational activities, most likely. Do I regret it, nope. For me the pros out weighed the cons. Each to their own!!!!

 

[Tisme]

A little of column A - A little from column B





And you are most likely correct as usual, I probably have sustained some kind of impairment due to my choice of recreational actives in my teens and early twenties. Oh well damage is done now, might as well indulge once or twice a year when I feel the urge.

Bringing it back to my original post, were there detrimental side effects due to my choice of recreational activities, most likely. Do I regret it, nope. For me the pros out weighed the cons. Each to their own!!!!

Truth is you probably aren't firing all cylinders if you have damaged it with THCs etc. Perhaps your early lead has been closed a bit or even pushed back to the pack?

 

[fiftyeight]

Truth is you probably aren't firing all cylinders if you have damaged it with THCs etc. Perhaps your early lead has been closed a bit or even pushed back to the pack?

Nah as I said before, THC was never my drug of choice. It stinks. I just do not have an issue with what other people choose to do with their life and therefor support the legalization of weed until/if it is proven to be a net negative for society.

I won the birth jackpot by being in born in white, male and in Australia. This is my biggest advantage in life and that has not changed. If I did have any genetic advantage my marks as child and early teen would suggest that it was a minimal advantage at best. The bell curve is nice and fat in the middle so a bit of wobble either side of average should not make too much of an impact on my life out comes

 

[Tisme]

I think the idea of the video is that people who use, use for a reason. They are self-medicating for psychic pain (poor parenting, abuse, neglect etc). The other point was that given a good upbringing and social network, there'd be no need for it - no need in a purely chemical sense. I think it was one of the most amazing pieces of research I've ever seen, given the scourge of drug use in Australia.

Try convincing someone on the other side of the fence of that. The favourite excuse from their lips are things like "it's harmless", "other (insert poison) is legal", "it medicinal", "everyone does it", "I self medicate", "safer than", et al.

I imagine the first thing most "everyone" parents do is softly raise their new born baby in their arms , peer into their eyes and gently whisper "I'm going to make sure you a wonderful life being drug f$%ked"... it's only fair they should enjoy the advantages too.