Arnold Layne Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 Yes we could withdraw from UN conventions. And all US investment would dry up. So too the Export to the US market. So.... lost business = lost jobs = country up the spout. Nice move! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pd666 Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 lol lol sorry i canny help it this thread makes me laugh like fook obviouslt ppl are caterign to there egos lca erm nope id rather support an actual proper political party that actually does mroe good all im seeign here is rambling and nonsense i havent seen any direct action thats gonna change anythign jsutalot of talk when laws change and lca are regongnised as makign these changes ill eat my words (which wont happen ) have a nice day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest justagirl Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 abstract 1 You have made it QUITE clear several times that you do not support the LCA, why do you keep repeating yourself? Come on, give it a break, it's like being back at school... I thought we might agree to disagree, and prehaps read each other a little more carefully in future, or shall we just carry on how we are? either ways fine by me, but i am getting a bit bored now..... love jag xxxxxxxxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abstract1 Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 (edited) why do you keep repeating yourself? B-e-c-a-u-s-e y-o-u d-o-n-'-t s-e-e-m t-o u-n-d-e-r-s-t-a-n-d w-h-a-t i-t i-s I-'m s-a-y-i-n-g t-o y-o-u, y-o-u s-e-e? Edited February 14, 2005 by abstract1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shug Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 Yes we could withdraw from UN conventions.And all US investment would dry up. So too the Export to the US market. So.... lost business = lost jobs = country up the spout. Nice move! 307751[/snapback] Pessimist. There are other possible outcomes, particularly since the US economy is on the edge of a precipice. It is possible that other countries will find their cajones and give the US the middle finger and also withdraw from useless prohibition laws and legalise cannabis in their countries. Perhaps that would be a good thing which you have missed in your in-depth examination of the implications of what I said. Paradox Devil666 lca erm nope id rather support an actual proper political party Good for you, at least you care, unlike the huge number of non-voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest justagirl Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 y-e-s i d-o y-o-u d-o-n-t t-h-i-n-k m-u-c-h o-f t-h-e l-c-a o-r t-h-e i-d-e-a i h-a-d t-o a-s-k p-e-o-p-l-e a-b-o-u-t m-o-n-ey a-n-d o-u-r g-r-e-e-d-y g-o-v-e-r-n-m-e-nt o-r a-m i s-t-i-l-l n-o-t o-n y-o-u-r w-a-v-e-l-e-n-g-t-h? i-f i a-m w-r-o-n-g i g-i-v-e u-p Y=o=u=r'=l=l h=a=v=e t=o s=p=e=l=l i=t o=u=t b-u-t i-f y-o-u h-a-v-e a-n-y s-e-n-s-e y-o-u w-o-n-t d-o i-t l-i-k-e t-h-i-s a-g-a-i-n i-t w-i-l-l h-u-r-t y-o-u-r f-i-n-g-e-r-s i-f y-o-u g-e-t o-n a r-o-l-l j-u-s-t-a-g--i-r-l-w-i-t-h-a-c-h-i-n-g-f-i-n-g-e-r-s! xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaticOne Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 however a lot of dealers don't want it legalised or the money will drop out of it, is this what I am up against on this site? just wondering? Did you really say that??? That is really insulting. The whole point of this place is totally lost on you isn't it. You really ought to have done a bit of reading on here before making comments like that!! UK420 IS ALL ABOUT DUMPING THE DEALER AND GROWING YOUR OWN. Clear enough for you? That is twice I have seen the accusation that we must all be dealers bandied about by your lot! Great PR tactics you use. EO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stone win Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 i havent seen any direct action thats gonna change anythign jsutalot of talk Hiya pd done a lot of that, to the point of loosing my liberty for a few days, and stood shoulder to shoulder with the best activists in the world, global issue remember,,,but for the moment I am trying a bit of talk , it just gets wasted on only a few on this site,as most of you have got the sence to know that the Lca is right, and if you had anysence , you'd all join for just one election....or even better have the gumption to stand for the GE, very easy to judge!!! come on , who has got the commitment to go for it!! please lets just get it right or it could be your door thats kicked down next,,,,,,,winstone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stone win Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 UK420 IS ALL ABOUT DUMPING THE DEALER AND GROWING YOUR OWN. and glad it is!!! but you are telling me that no one sells who uses this site, and wouldn't be uspet to see it legalised , as they would be loosing money as the pricies would drop, the high prices for herb would plummet, EO get real.. winstone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaticOne Posted February 14, 2005 Share Posted February 14, 2005 and glad it is!!!but you are telling me that no one sells who uses this site, and wouldn't be uspet to see it legalised , as they would be loosing money as the pricies would drop, the high prices for herb would plummet, EO get real.. winstone 307820[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest justagirl Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 right earlier we started discussing how the government would legalise weed, we had a bit of debate then the thread dissapeared, i asked what would you do if you were in government and had the resigning decision on how to legalise cannabis, as i thought it was pretty obvious the government couldnt decide how to make the revenue, i thought if we came up with a plan it would help, and guess what, someone did, and here it is, this was submitted to house of commons and was to be the new cannabis law, it was only in 2001, so thats how close it is to legalisation, behind the talk to frank campaign, and the shady laws for all when it comes to cannabis, take a read and comment if you like, i really wish it had been passed, made alot of sense to me, and sort of covered what was being discussed, i found this whilst i was waiting for 420 to return when entering legalising cannabis into the google site, it is in the governments statioanry office online, and for a moment thought i was tripping or someone from above was tapping into my thoughts..... shocked and hoping its not far away JAG House of Commons Session 2001- 02 Internet Publications Other Public Bills before Parliament Arrangement of Clauses (Contents) Legalisation of Cannabis Bill -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A B I L L TO Legalise and regulate the sale, supply and use of cannabis for recreational and therapeutic purposes; and for connected purposes. BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1 Rescheduling of cannabis and cannabis resin (1) In the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971— (a) in subsection (1)(a) of section 2 (controlled drugs and their classification for the purposes of the Act), for the words “Part I, II or III” there shall be substituted the words “Part I, II, III or IIIA”; (B) in paragraph 1(a) of Part II of Schedule 2 (controlled drugs), the words “cannabis and cannabis resin” shall be omitted; and © after Part III, there shall be inserted— "PART IIIA CLASS D DRUGS 1. The following substances, namely— Cannabis. Cannabis Resin. 2. Any preparation or other product containing a substance for the time being specified in paragraph 1 above. (2) In paragraph 1(a) of Schedule 1 to the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 1985, the words “cannabis and cannabis resin” shall be omitted. 2 Supply of cannabis by cultivation (1) Section 6 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 shall be amended as follows. (2) In subsection (1), after the words “time being in force”, there shall be inserted the words “to subsection (3) below or the terms of any licence issued under section 7A of this Act,”. (3) After subsection (2) there shall be inserted— "(3) Subject to the following conditions, it shall be lawful for an unlicensed private person to cultivate hemp for the production of a Class D drug for his personal use. The conditions are that— (a) Class D drugs produced under this provision shall not be commercially supplied by such a person or from his premises; (B) the cultivation must not take place on commercial land or premises or on any land or premises other than the place where such a person resides; and © the cultivation and production shall comply with any regulations made by the Secretary of State." 3 Licensing After section 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, there shall be inserted— "7A Licensing in relation to Class D Drugs (1) The Secretary of State may by licence permit any of the following activities— (a) the importation or exportation of Class D drugs; (B) the cultivation of plants for production of Class D drugs for wholesale supply; © the production of Class D drugs for wholesale supply; (d) the commercial wholesale supply of Class D drugs; (e) the non-commercial supply of Class D drugs; (f) the commercial retail supply of Class D drugs; and (g) the provision of public premises for the smoking or other ingestion of Class D drugs. (2) A licence under subsection (1)— (a) shall be in the name of a person; (B) may limit the permitted activity to a certain place or premises; © shall be in the form prescribed by the Secretary of State by regulations; (d) may be subject to the payment of such fees, charges or any other conditions as may be provided for in regulations made by the Secretary of State; (e) shall be for such period as the Secretary of State sees fit but shall be for a maximum of ten years; and (f) shall be subject to renewal or revocation. (3) Regulations made by the Secretary of State under this section— (a) shall provide for appeals against the refusal, revocation of failure to renew a licence; and (B) shall provide for minimum quality, grading and labelling standards to apply to any of the activities permitted under subsection (1) above." 4 Consequential amendments (1) The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 is amended as follows— (2) In section 4 (restriction of production and supply of controlled drugs), in subsection (1) after the word “force”, there shall be inserted the words “or to the terms of any licence issued under section 7A of this Act.”. (3) In section 5 (restriction of possession of controlled drugs), after the words “controlled drug”, there shall be inserted the words “other than a Class D drug”. (4) In subsection (3) of section 5, after the words “section 28 of this Act”, there shall be inserted the words “or to the terms of any licence inserted under section 7A of this Act.”. (5) In section 8 (occupiers etc. to be punishable for permitting certain activities to take place there), for paragraph (d) there shall be substituted— "(d) smoking prepared opium; and (d) smoking or otherwise ingesting Class D drugs save on residential premises or in accordance with the terms of a licence issued under section 7A of this Act,"" (6) In subsection (2) of section 18 (miscellaneous offences), after the words “section 3”, there shall be inserted the words “or 7A”. (7) In section 25 (prosecution and punishment of offences), after subsection (2), there shall be inserted— (2A) An offence committed in relation to a Class D drug shall be punishable as if it had been committed in relation to a Class C drug. 5 Expenses There shall be paid out of money provided by Parliament— (a) any expenses of the Secretary of State under this Act; and (B) any increase attributable to this Act of the sums payable under any other Act. 6 Short title, commencement and extent (1) This Act may be cited as the Legislation of Cannabis Act 2001. (2) This Act shall come into force three months after it is passed. (3) This Act extends to Northern Ireland. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © Parliamentary copyright 2001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad (the impala) Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 herrrumph.............to my mind, this smacks of "selling out", which really is not where I'm from at all...............ask yourself what you ACTUALLY want - I want medi users to be free of worry when using their chosen herb, I want to see a situation where that happens - if we go along your projected path, you are intrinsically selling your beloved weed to Babylon- lock, stock and bloody barrel! I want to see people continue to be healed with clean natural herbs, NOT some bloody chemicalised, taxed, and probably highly contaminated commercial "blairweed"! I've said it before, I'll say it again allopathic (drug) "medicine" does not have a god-given right to exclusivity - there are many other alternative disciplines which have in the past used cannabis with great success - I can think of no finer way for it to be made available for those in medical need from a qualified medical herbalist, homoeopath, or "conventional" doctor come to that (it used to be in the British Pharmacoepia)...........we don't HAVE to "sell out" - there are other, far better alternatives! I really don't give a flying fig whether its legal or illegal - the thing that is important to me is whether or not medi users get real whole herb - simple as that! And as to the asinine comments about board members worrying about the price dropping................that is utter bollocks - most of us want to see price collapse, and a total disappearance of damn dealers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest justagirl Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 herrrumph.............to my mind, this smacks of "selling out", which really is not where I'm from at all...............ask yourself what you ACTUALLY want - I want medi users to be free of worry when using their chosen herb, I want to see a situation where that happens - if we go along your projected path, you are intrinsically selling your beloved weed to Babylon- lock, stock and bloody barrel! I want to see people continue to be healed with clean natural herbs, NOT some bloody chemicalised, taxed, and probably highly contaminated commercial "blairweed"! I've said it before, I'll say it again allopathic (drug) "medicine" does not have a god-given right to exclusivity - there are many other alternative disciplines which have in the past used cannabis with great success - I can think of no finer way for it to be made available for those in medical need from a qualified medical herbalist, homoeopath, or "conventional" doctor come to that (it used to be in the British Pharmacoepia)...........we don't HAVE to "sell out" - there are other, far better alternatives! I really don't give a flying fig whether its legal or illegal - the thing that is important to me is whether or not medi users get real whole herb - simple as that! And as to the asinine comments about board members worrying about the price dropping................that is utter bollocks - most of us want to see price collapse, and a total disappearance of damn dealers.... 307959[/snapback] i agree with a huge chunk of what you are saying, i am trying my best at this very minute to get medi groups such as thc4ms freedom to continue and have put a petition on petition them, and i'd bloody love to see the price collapse, i wanted to put signs on road islands that said weeds half price see your local dealer, but alot of close freinds said i'd be shot so i havent started on that yet, its a scary subject to approach as there are plenty of people that would hate to see weeds value dissapear.....shame we cant all be on the same level, it certainly works for me... it might seem like i'm selling out, but again i think i have been misunderstood, i am looking at ways the lca could try and approach the subject of legalising weed, not sugesting this is the only way forward...just one way... you mention better alternatives, lets have them, then i can try and work on putting that to the LCA, please this is what i want...ideas!!!! now legal or illegal, please legal for the medi users, i dont want them to be too scared of using cannabis, and for me personally i dont like the idea of being busted, and owning a grow shop i cant really get a grow on or i'll be putting to many eggs in one basket me thinks, so legalsie it so i can grow my own and can leave the dealers well alone, if its legal and people can grow, then hey, no dealers, with anyluck, and weed would be free cause you wouldnt be buying it, your'd be growing it, with no fear of those nasty piggys banging down your door.... thanks and let me know if you have a few alternatives i can look into, i really need some more brain power, i'm about frazzled... jag x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad (the impala) Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 I'm not saying I have the answers -it isn't a simple subject - but there seems to be this mindset that the only useful goal is "legalisation" - on balance, would you sooner see thc4ms and budbuddies continue to grow naturally, allowing patients to choose a natural folk medicine, knowing full well, that although it remained "illegal" on paper, if you were a bona fide medi grower or user there wasn't a snowballs chance in hell of getting into trouble or some strange legal "fudge" whereby the "rights" to medicinal cannabis are handed over to the drug companies, there is then a vicious crackdown on "home growers"(as in their parlance, they are no longer needed), thus effectively ending the supply of clean natural herb? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest justagirl Posted February 15, 2005 Share Posted February 15, 2005 "(3) Subject to the following conditions, it shall be lawful for an unlicensed private person to cultivate hemp for the production of a Class D drug for his personal use. The conditions are that— (a) Class D drugs produced under this provision shall not be commercially supplied by such a person or from his premises; ( the cultivation must not take place on commercial land or premises or on any land or premises other than the place where such a person resides; and © the cultivation and production shall comply with any regulations made by the Secretary of State." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts