I thought this article was quite good
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...edicalresearch
Quote:
|
To return cannabis to class B will do nothing except double the maximum sentence for possession, to five years. Since this sentence is almost never used, the effect of next week's announcement will be zero.
|
In some ways I believe the current situation is due to the success of HM Customs etc in preventing the smuggling into the uk of the 'traditional' sources of cannabis, prevalent e.g. during the 1970's - mostly resin, rather than 'grass'. They all suffered from the same problems, they were bulky relative to the overall value, compared to heroin & cocaine, & also smelly, so hard to conceal from sniffer dogs.
So along comes modern genetics technology that enables the plants characteristics to be selectively 'tailored', making them easier to grow 'at home', while raising the levels of the 'active ingredients'.
- however that is increasingly being exploited by organised crime & there are almost daily news reports of large scale 'factory' operations producing the drug, rather than a few people 'growing their own'. In my opinion increasing the classification to 'B' from 'C' will not change this one iota.
I would suggest that spending money on educating the young people most vulnerable to the potential psychological effects as to exactly what the facts are, especially when words like 'lethal' are being bandied about, would be money better spent than on locking people up - the 'reefer madness' headlines of the late sixties only made the cannabis users at that time laugh ( well giggle a bit, anyway
).
The risk is, imo, that the same might happen now, when arguably there may be more truth in some of the reports of increased incidence of psychosis in cannabis users.
- one problem there being that there isn't just one kind of 'skunk', there are several, each with different profiles regarding the active ingredients they contain. There was a TV documentary recently that highlighted how very different the effect of smoking the different varieties could be, in terms of how 'high' or 'low' the sensation of being stoned was perceived by the user - some were reported to be much more likely to induce feelings of anxiety or even paranoia, than others.
Which makes it even more nonsensical to ignore the advisory body, in my opinion, as seeming to go for a 'lock more people' up strategy is ignoring the complexity of the problem.