comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits? Look cool?
Its not smoking when you vape as it doesnt burn just warms up the molecule to extract the goodness.
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits? Look cool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even that’s no longer the case
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 27 seconds ago
This paper summarises and compares the impacts of cannabis decriminalisation measures in two countries. In Australia, an expiation model of decriminalisation succeeded in avoiding the imposition of criminal convictions for many offenders, but substantial numbers of offenders received criminal convictions because of a general "net-widening" in cannabis offence detections, and the failure of many offenders to pay expiation fees and thus avoid criminal prosecution. Despite these problems, the expiation approach has been cost-effective, reducing enforcement costs without leading to increased cannabis use. In the United States, cannabis decriminalisation similarly reduced enforcement costs, with enforcement resources generally redirected toward trafficking and other illicit drugs. There were no increases in cannabis use or substantial problems that could be ascribed to decriminalisation. The implications for other countries are discussed, with particular attention to the importance of implementation issues, monitoring, and evaluation. Although decriminalisation has succeeded in reducing enforcement and other costs without increasing the problems associated with cannabis use, the same impacts would not necessarily result from the legalisation of cannabis or the decriminalisation of other illicit drugs.
What have you got mate?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry?
Tell me what I need as such. You’ve put up one report and what? It’s legal now is it?
Nope, sorry it’s not. Maybe the finest minds in our political and judicial systems missed that report too. Along with those in every other European country bar the Netherlands.
Here’s an idea. Get it sent to them and they’re bound to change their minds. I mean what could possibly go wrong with such logic?
You’re not quite getting this are you? It’s ILLEGAL. End of despite your “what have you got mate?”
Until the law is changed I’m quite content. It’s you who isn’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ginger, are you really going with this greatest political and legal minds stuff?
Didn't your finest most brilliantest minds give the fiasco that is Brexit?
I'm not pro or con that argument, but FFS
Just wait till the legalization lobby start throwing they're political donations around.
It's also amazing how many people don't have a problem with it since adding it to their investmen portfolios.
Even ex-cabinet ministers who refused to decriminalize it when they had the chance are now investing.
These are the true bastirts.
comment by Wieghorst (U12621)
posted 7 minutes ago
Its not smoking when you vape as it doesnt burn just warms up the molecule to extract the goodness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits of that?
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
So bringing in billions of dollars being able to tax something that people were already doing, in what will be the same kind of numbers whether it was legal or illegal, is a momentously stupid decision? That is ultimately the crux of it. Whether it is legal or illegal, people will still do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Billions of dollars in tax? hahahahahaha. Aye ok.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At an average of $2.00-$2.50 per gram?
No problem.
There are millions of people who use it and will buy it from the government. The ONLY reason it's legalized is because it is a massive tax grab.
And the reason I will be quitting sooner than later.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 43 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
So bringing in billions of dollars being able to tax something that people were already doing, in what will be the same kind of numbers whether it was legal or illegal, is a momentously stupid decision? That is ultimately the crux of it. Whether it is legal or illegal, people will still do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Billions of dollars in tax? hahahahahaha. Aye ok.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you just wumming now? The State of Colorado alone brings in hundreds of millions of tax a year through their weed laws. There are dozens of independent reports that show leaglising it here would expect to add 3.5 billion per year. You keep arguing things that you have no idea about. It's really weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh ffs.
Read this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45674260
And now tell me what amazing detail you have on your numbers.
Christ almighty but yeah, nobody does any research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's all you've read though isn't it. And tell me what numbers on there back up your point?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you being deliberately obtuse.
You said I’d done no research. I gave you one of the most recent articles.
You asked what research and I’ve given it again.
None of the numbers or the level of research are mine ffs. They’re there form other journalists research.
No doubt you’ll ignore them because it doesn’t suit.
Billions of dollars ffs 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But where in that article does it talk about the money it will bring into the economy through tax? That was your point. I can show you actual facts and the money that Colarado, with stricter laws, has benefited from over the last 2 years. I can show you economic projections from experts that say what it is expected to bring in. You just say "billions ffs"- you literally have nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dearie me
“Canadian cities say they are on the front lines of marijuana legalisation.
They will bear part of the responsibility for policing the new regime as well as for managing things like zoning, retail locations, home cultivation, business licensing and regulations around public consumption.
But many cities say they have yet to hear how federal taxes collected on cannabis sales will trickle down.
Some cities have also chosen to opt-out of allowing legal pot shops in their districts altogether.
The federal government projects it will raise $400m a year in tax revenues on the sale of cannabis. In a deal reached with the provinces, the feds will keep 25% of tax revenues up to an annual limit of $100m.
The rest will go to the provinces, which in turn will give funding to cities.“
You didn’t read it did you? Just say so.
Capped at $100m for the federal authorities and then there’s the cost of collecting it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the rest goes to the provinces and territories.
The provinces and territories have responsibility for health-care, education, social-housing, so that's where the money goes. Uncharacteristically good idea.
So let's add this up.
$2.00/gr = $2,000.00/kilo
1,000kilos = $2 million
So 500 metric tons is 1 billion dollars.
It's not so much the collection of taxes that's a problem but rather how our finest political and legal minds will use said monies.
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
Good old taxable booze though eh. I mean forget about the thousands of people who die a year from it. The issues it causes in families, social places, drain on healthcare I mean I can continue but you get my drift.
Anyone tell me how many people died from weed in 2017?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but the "finest minds" have deemed that legal.
Because they have well....... the finest minds.
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
All the concerns raised by the anti weed guys have been ironed out and that's why the decriminalisation/ legalisation 'Arab spring' is picking up momentum.
From Ginger's link I have read a link about South Africa and I think the court there made a great decision apart from the last bit on sale and supply.
"It will not be a criminal offence for an adult person to use or be in possession of cannabis in private for his or her personal consumption."
It will, however, remain illegal to use cannabis in public, and to sell and supply it."
Personal consumption of Marijuana should not be a crime. However, I would agree with laws prohibiting public smoking of Marijuana and as for age the same rules as alcohol.
It is a contravention of human rights to prohibit anyone from doing as they wish with their lungs or any other body part so long as they don't infringe the rights of others while doing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I smoke lots of weed, but that is pure ballacks.
Optional seat belts in cars?
No helmet laws for bikers?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Anyone seen the film limitless? That's what gin and tonic does to me.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 13 minutes ago
Canada already did that and that's why they're going ahead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article I read indicated that this would give them the chance to undertake far better studies so that’s what I meant in that we could learn from these
========
Which portion are you referring to exactly.
I doubt anyone would decriminalise Marijuana without undertaking a satisfactory amount of studies.
comment by Aye, OK, its Subs - what's the fvkkin point!? (U5683)
Good move IMO.
The old treatment of drug abuse as a criminal issue has abjectly failed all of us.
========
Agreed.
The issue of prohibition and criminal penalties for certain substances has been studied for over 100 years.
The most popular case study is obviously the US prohibition era, 1920s to early 30s. They thought they'd criminalise alcohol. How did that work out?
Decriminalisation might have some teething problems but its better than what we have now.
Sign in if you want to comment
Oh Canada
Page 16 of 16
12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits? Look cool?
posted on 18/10/18
Its not smoking when you vape as it doesnt burn just warms up the molecule to extract the goodness.
posted on 18/10/18
ya Fuds
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 12 seconds ago
comment by Dominic Shimmin (U1734)
posted 49 seconds ago
Smoking is for idiots.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Spot on
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits? Look cool?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Even that’s no longer the case
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 30 minutes ago
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 27 seconds ago
This paper summarises and compares the impacts of cannabis decriminalisation measures in two countries. In Australia, an expiation model of decriminalisation succeeded in avoiding the imposition of criminal convictions for many offenders, but substantial numbers of offenders received criminal convictions because of a general "net-widening" in cannabis offence detections, and the failure of many offenders to pay expiation fees and thus avoid criminal prosecution. Despite these problems, the expiation approach has been cost-effective, reducing enforcement costs without leading to increased cannabis use. In the United States, cannabis decriminalisation similarly reduced enforcement costs, with enforcement resources generally redirected toward trafficking and other illicit drugs. There were no increases in cannabis use or substantial problems that could be ascribed to decriminalisation. The implications for other countries are discussed, with particular attention to the importance of implementation issues, monitoring, and evaluation. Although decriminalisation has succeeded in reducing enforcement and other costs without increasing the problems associated with cannabis use, the same impacts would not necessarily result from the legalisation of cannabis or the decriminalisation of other illicit drugs.
What have you got mate?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry?
Tell me what I need as such. You’ve put up one report and what? It’s legal now is it?
Nope, sorry it’s not. Maybe the finest minds in our political and judicial systems missed that report too. Along with those in every other European country bar the Netherlands.
Here’s an idea. Get it sent to them and they’re bound to change their minds. I mean what could possibly go wrong with such logic?
You’re not quite getting this are you? It’s ILLEGAL. End of despite your “what have you got mate?”
Until the law is changed I’m quite content. It’s you who isn’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ginger, are you really going with this greatest political and legal minds stuff?
Didn't your finest most brilliantest minds give the fiasco that is Brexit?
I'm not pro or con that argument, but FFS
Just wait till the legalization lobby start throwing they're political donations around.
It's also amazing how many people don't have a problem with it since adding it to their investmen portfolios.
Even ex-cabinet ministers who refused to decriminalize it when they had the chance are now investing.
These are the true bastirts.
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Wieghorst (U12621)
posted 7 minutes ago
Its not smoking when you vape as it doesnt burn just warms up the molecule to extract the goodness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the benefits of that?
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
So bringing in billions of dollars being able to tax something that people were already doing, in what will be the same kind of numbers whether it was legal or illegal, is a momentously stupid decision? That is ultimately the crux of it. Whether it is legal or illegal, people will still do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Billions of dollars in tax? hahahahahaha. Aye ok.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At an average of $2.00-$2.50 per gram?
No problem.
There are millions of people who use it and will buy it from the government. The ONLY reason it's legalized is because it is a massive tax grab.
And the reason I will be quitting sooner than later.
posted on 18/10/18
Anyone tried heroin?
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 hours, 6 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 43 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 4 minutes ago
So bringing in billions of dollars being able to tax something that people were already doing, in what will be the same kind of numbers whether it was legal or illegal, is a momentously stupid decision? That is ultimately the crux of it. Whether it is legal or illegal, people will still do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Billions of dollars in tax? hahahahahaha. Aye ok.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you just wumming now? The State of Colorado alone brings in hundreds of millions of tax a year through their weed laws. There are dozens of independent reports that show leaglising it here would expect to add 3.5 billion per year. You keep arguing things that you have no idea about. It's really weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh ffs.
Read this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45674260
And now tell me what amazing detail you have on your numbers.
Christ almighty but yeah, nobody does any research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's all you've read though isn't it. And tell me what numbers on there back up your point?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you being deliberately obtuse.
You said I’d done no research. I gave you one of the most recent articles.
You asked what research and I’ve given it again.
None of the numbers or the level of research are mine ffs. They’re there form other journalists research.
No doubt you’ll ignore them because it doesn’t suit.
Billions of dollars ffs 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But where in that article does it talk about the money it will bring into the economy through tax? That was your point. I can show you actual facts and the money that Colarado, with stricter laws, has benefited from over the last 2 years. I can show you economic projections from experts that say what it is expected to bring in. You just say "billions ffs"- you literally have nothing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dearie me
“Canadian cities say they are on the front lines of marijuana legalisation.
They will bear part of the responsibility for policing the new regime as well as for managing things like zoning, retail locations, home cultivation, business licensing and regulations around public consumption.
But many cities say they have yet to hear how federal taxes collected on cannabis sales will trickle down.
Some cities have also chosen to opt-out of allowing legal pot shops in their districts altogether.
The federal government projects it will raise $400m a year in tax revenues on the sale of cannabis. In a deal reached with the provinces, the feds will keep 25% of tax revenues up to an annual limit of $100m.
The rest will go to the provinces, which in turn will give funding to cities.“
You didn’t read it did you? Just say so.
Capped at $100m for the federal authorities and then there’s the cost of collecting it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the rest goes to the provinces and territories.
The provinces and territories have responsibility for health-care, education, social-housing, so that's where the money goes. Uncharacteristically good idea.
So let's add this up.
$2.00/gr = $2,000.00/kilo
1,000kilos = $2 million
So 500 metric tons is 1 billion dollars.
It's not so much the collection of taxes that's a problem but rather how our finest political and legal minds will use said monies.
posted on 18/10/18
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
Good old taxable booze though eh. I mean forget about the thousands of people who die a year from it. The issues it causes in families, social places, drain on healthcare I mean I can continue but you get my drift.
Anyone tell me how many people died from weed in 2017?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but the "finest minds" have deemed that legal.
Because they have well....... the finest minds.
posted on 18/10/18
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 51 minutes ago
All the concerns raised by the anti weed guys have been ironed out and that's why the decriminalisation/ legalisation 'Arab spring' is picking up momentum.
From Ginger's link I have read a link about South Africa and I think the court there made a great decision apart from the last bit on sale and supply.
"It will not be a criminal offence for an adult person to use or be in possession of cannabis in private for his or her personal consumption."
It will, however, remain illegal to use cannabis in public, and to sell and supply it."
Personal consumption of Marijuana should not be a crime. However, I would agree with laws prohibiting public smoking of Marijuana and as for age the same rules as alcohol.
It is a contravention of human rights to prohibit anyone from doing as they wish with their lungs or any other body part so long as they don't infringe the rights of others while doing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I smoke lots of weed, but that is pure ballacks.
Optional seat belts in cars?
No helmet laws for bikers?
posted on 18/10/18
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/10/18
Anyone seen the film limitless? That's what gin and tonic does to me.
posted on 19/10/18
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
comment by Pain (U1282)
posted 13 minutes ago
Canada already did that and that's why they're going ahead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The article I read indicated that this would give them the chance to undertake far better studies so that’s what I meant in that we could learn from these
========
Which portion are you referring to exactly.
I doubt anyone would decriminalise Marijuana without undertaking a satisfactory amount of studies.
posted on 19/10/18
comment by Aye, OK, its Subs - what's the fvkkin point!? (U5683)
Good move IMO.
The old treatment of drug abuse as a criminal issue has abjectly failed all of us.
========
Agreed.
The issue of prohibition and criminal penalties for certain substances has been studied for over 100 years.
The most popular case study is obviously the US prohibition era, 1920s to early 30s. They thought they'd criminalise alcohol. How did that work out?
Decriminalisation might have some teething problems but its better than what we have now.
Page 16 of 16
12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16