Pubdate: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 Source: Essex Chronicle (UK) Copyright: 2004 Quicksilver Media Contact: http://www.thisisessex.co.uk Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1317 Author: Ivan Sage, Anon, Don Barnard [LCA] CANNABIS ANALYSIS CANNABIS: EVIL OR A HARMLESS WEED OR A HARMLESS HIGH? - BY Inan Sage SKUNK PSYCHOSIS IS NOT A SOFT OPTION - Anon LEGALISATION IS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD - BY Don Barnard [LCA] DRUG REFORM IS BACKWARD STEP - Editorial Comment - - CANNABIS:EVIL WEED OR HARMLESS HIGH, Ivan Sage The Government's controversial reforms in cannabis law come into effect from today. While some are welcoming a relaxation in the law, others are far from happy. Here, Ivan Sage gives an overview of the reforms and reports on how the changes in the law will. be policed. From today, cannabis is to be reclassified from a Class B to a Class C drug. The relaxation in the law has caused great consternation among some medics, mental health workers and those who would prefer the law tightened even further, although it has offered encouragement to others who would like to see the use of cannabis decriminalised. One thing is for sure though many are confused as to whether or not the possession or smoking of cannabis is legal. The fact is, possession and use of cannabis in this country is now, and always has been, illegal. People consistently found in possession of small amounts of cannabis could be arrested, although they are more likely to receive an informal on.the-spot warning and have their drug confiscated. Police have been advised to use discretion as whether or not to make an arrest. Under new guidelines, smokers are far more likely to be arrested should they he seen smoking publicly near schools or youth clubs. The penalties for dealing cannabis have not changed - there is still a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison. Many pro-cannabis supporters see reclassification as a stepping stone in the right direction in their desire to decriminalise the drug. Others believe it has medicinal benefits - in fact, trials of cannabis-based drugs are currently under way to ascertain its effectiveness in alleviating pain and the symptoms of illnesses such as multiple sclerosis. Some people suggest cannabis is merely a 'soft' drug, no worse than cigarettes or alcohol, both of which are legal. Home Secretary David Blunkett believes relaxing the law on cannabis will give credibility to our drug laws and will enable the police to focus their efforts on tackling what he considers to be more dangerous drugs in circulation such as cocaine and heroin. Tory leader Michael Howard disagrees and has accused the Government of sending out a "con-fused and muddled signal". Howard has slated the Government's handling of the move and its UKP 1m advertising campaign designed to get its message across more clearly - He has also pledged to reverse the cannabis reform should the Tories return to power. Several health experts are deeply worried that the reform suggests smoking cannabis is safer and less harmful than other Class B drugs. A spokesman for the British Medical Association said: "We are extremely concerned the public will think that reclassification equals 'safe'. It does not." Here we ask two people - the concerned parent of a child who smokes cannabis, and a pro-cannabis campaigner - for their views. - - SKUNK PSYCHOSIS IS NOT A SOFT OPTION, Anon. High hopes: While some campaigners claim cannabis has real medical benefits, others' experiences of the drug are far from harmless. The "soft'! drug cannabis is now downgraded in its level of criminal seriousness. This family believes it a wrong decision because cannabis may not have the same physical effects as hard drugs, but its damage to some minds long after use as ceased was, apparently, overlooked by the legislators. It is foolish to say that everybody who uses cannabis will become a raging lifelong psychotic. But you cannot predict who will survive the experience unscathed. A significant, and we believe growing minority, are ruining their lives by taking as little as one joint of skunk which makes them off the wall and often leaves them there for months, years even in some cases it could be for life. The simple joint of the 60's is not he same as the very much stronger substance often mixed with chemical impurities available easily everywhere today. Start Of A Nightmare One night three years ago, our son came home in a black mood shouting down the street. We thought he was drunk. It was the beginning of a nightmare for him and the rest of us, and now involving others, that is still not resolved. Later, a letter from his employer arrived, and as a result we discovered he bad been taking the drug regularly for months. He had even been found among the company machinery claiming to be Jesus. He was abusive, irrational and illogical but we did manage to get him to see our GP who referred him for local psychiatric help. By now he was a chain smoking (ordinary cigarettes) haunted individual. He did not take medication, or admit there was anything wrong - it was everybody else who was wrong and against him. We could not, and sometimes still cannot, get through to him against a tirade of abuse and illogical outbursts. For 18 months he was unemployed and unemployable. He rarely kept psychiatric appointments, but stayed in his room for long days playing music - the same pulsating piece -. at full volume, sometimes at three and four in the morning. We cut the power, apart from the centre light to his room for the sake of our own and our neighbours sanity. He caused our telephone bill to increase to UKP 360 in one quarter, so we were forced to get call barring. This renewed his belief that we were against him and he raved of the "gangs of Chelmsford" who he said respected him as "a hero of superior intellect" - whatever that was supposed to mean Talk Of Suicide Just when we thought things were improving they were by no means right, however - he got involved in a 30-second incident in a pub which has resulted in the criminal justice system being involved. As a result he may get proper psychiatric treatment or be sent to jail - which has already started him talking of suicide. The effects of this substance on our family, and the knock-on effect on others, has been the opposite of soft'. Not only has it made life hell for us, and caused tension with neighbours, it has resulted in a minor, but in the eyes of the law, serious injury to an innocent bystander. Our other sons speak of friends who are "totally out of it" as a result of using this "harmless substance" although they know many who seem perfectly okay. Our son's own good friends all seem perfectly pleasant, balanced. normal young men. The message given out that cannabis should be taken less seriously is a misguided one. One experience of skunk is capable of ruining a person mentally for life. It really is no "soft" option. - - LEGALISATION IS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD, Don Barnard of the Legalise Cannabis Alliance I cannot understand why anyone wants to retain a law that allows for putting cannabis-users in jail. From January 29, the possession of cannabis will still be an arrestable offence for all minors and those who flout the law. Adults found in possession of an unspecified amount of cannabis (consistent with personal use) may be arrested, and that means preventing the sick and dying from cultivating and using the only medicine that works for many of them. Why should someone be classed as a criminal simply for growing and consuming a plant, providing they are doing no harm and posing no threat to anyone? Alleged Hazards There's been much talk about psychosis and other alleged hazards relating to cannabis use. Space does not permit me to address how dangerous cannabis is - or is not. But I do accept we should be concerned about the health of the 4.5 million cannabis users in the UK. But let's get real. These bad things have been happening under prohibition for over 30 years. Why should anyone think that continuing prohibition would improve the situation? Is the law just? People who 'use' or 'grow cannabis' for their own consumption, or to share. with friends in private are punished. The disputed issue is whether they should be punished. A debate on the desirability of amending the laws controlling cannabis cannot proceed sensibly unless it begins with a reason in favour of punishing people who cultivate and use cannabis. Ask yourself - and your friends, neighbours, teachers and those involved in implementing. Government's anti-drug strategy - do you think that the laws that put people in jail for non-commercial cannabis cultivation or possessing cannabis are justified? if so, why? If the question cannot be answered to your satisfaction, you should conclude that People using cannabis should not be punished. Different Approach. A Criminal Justice led system has not worked, does address the concerns of parents and. the medical profession. It's time to try' a different approach. We need legislation that reduces the harms, without infringing upon personal privacy and the right to chose one's lifestyle and beliefs. We need legislation aimed at protection, not control Reclassification is an illusion of change. The legalise Cannabis Alliance believes the way forward is a legal regulated control of cannabis with licensed outlets such as cafes, with quality control, education, restricted access to the young, and removal the criminal contact in obtaining cannabis. - - DRUG REFORM IS BACKWARD STEP, Editorial Comment 'The confusion surrounding the declassification of cannabis is yet another worrying example of this Government's apparent inability to deliver a clear strategy on crime-related issues. The tough on crime manifesto pledge is, apparently, a long abandoned promise. Whatever way you look at it, the perceived impression given to youngsters is that cannabis, from today classified as a Class C drug, is relatively harmless. The Home Secretary's view that declassification will allow the police to target the use and, supply of 'harder' drugs sounds rather hollow. This is just another way of reducing crime figures by manipulating the legal system. Side~stepping the obvious harm the drug can cause to health, pro-cannabis lobbyists want legalisation. In fact, they insist cannabis has medicinal values. That may be so but, in that case, its use should only he allowed under strict medical conditions, and only alter the drug has undergone the same stringent medical trials as demanded of all other prescribed drugs. You don't need to take medicine unless you are ill - so the majority of the pro-cannabis lobbyists' argument fails flat when you consider they only want it legalised so they can use it for their own recreational purposes without getting their collars felt. They argue that alcohol and tobacco are legal. Why not cannabis? Well, what good to society has come from tobacco or alcohol? Ask the medics what they think. Ask the sufferers of smoking-related illnesses or alcoholics what the benefits are. Ask their families and the bereaved.There is nothing worthwhile to gain by adding another drug, known to be far more carcinogenic than cigarettes, to that legalised list. With so many crimes being drug , surely it would be far better to crackdown hard on one of the.major sources of crime than to take the easy option of fiddling the figures. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin