Should cannabis be legal with restrictions?

Question

The American Medical Association (AMA) has called for the government to review its classification of marijuana.
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index…

Answer 1

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

I have a feeling that any review by the AMA will result pretty much as our own did with Prof. Nutt. I don't think we are prepared for an overhaul of the classification systems.

One issue we have is with driving. We cannot set a legal limit as with alcohol as reaction to cannabis is very variable. THC may be in our systems long after it is detectable in blood and urine samples. There may be minor impairments in the cognitive functioning of chronic users even when they are not 'intoxicated'. It would be very difficult to determine if someone was over a limit as we would all metabolise it differently. It has been suggested that driving is less impaired by cannabis intoxication than with alcohol (Smiley, 1986)

One positive is that we would have a better knowledge of the strength. Hawks (1982) suggests that the average joint contains between 0.3 and 1g of cannabis. This can give THC content between 2.5 and 150 mg (1-15% THC although not all THC is ingested). The actual amount of THC absorbed by each user is very difficult to determine. One of the issues with drug users is that they are often unaware of the strength of the cannabis they are buying.
In Amsterdam where it has been decriminalised you can enter a shop and ask for advice on the potency of a strain. We will always create problems when people are sent to back street dealers for their drugs. The more harsh the criminal punishments the worse the drugs get. In fact drug use tends to go up when harsher restrictions are placed on them.

There is always the issue of 'Does it affect people with mental health problems?' Well yes it can do. There is no conclusive evidence that it causes these problems but any drug can affect you if you have preexisting mental health problems. Consider the Seroxat controversy (a.k.a Paxil, Paroxotine) an SSRI that has been found to in SOME cases to increase suicidal tendencies. This drug is perfectly legal and prescribed by your GP but can affect SOME users to the point of attempting suicide. For others it works a treat.

As Nadia Solowij puts so well 'Given the rates of [cannabis] use worldwide over the past two decades, if chronic cannabis use produced severe cognitive impairments, it is likely that there would be no need to be researching the question in the 1990s.' We would not be researching it today 11 years after Nadia's book came out if we didn't still have questions to answer on it's effects.

I don't think cannabis with ever be legal or even decriminalised. I don't think there is much difficulty in finding illegal drugs if you want them. I believe it would be in the government's interests financially (extra tax) and would save them on the costs of taking users and dealers to court and on keeping them detained in prison.

Source(s):

Seroxat info - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paroxetine
Cannabis and cognitive functioning, Nadia Solowij (1998) from Cambridge University Press

Answer 2

Yep. "No restrictions just legal." Meaning kids should be allowed to take it? I say no, unless their parents let them take it. What about driving? There have to be restrictions. I agree on shrooms.

Answer 3

No restrictions just legal. Give me my shrooms too. I have to escape from the insane world from time to time so I don't twist off and depopulate an area.

Answer 4

Absolutely.

Answer 5

All non-deadly drugs should be legal, at least for private, recreational use.

Answer 6

legal with restrictions isn't legalization. That is decriminalization. And yes it should be decriminalized.

Answer 7

Yes with no restrictions I want to go to a store and just buy it

Answer 8

Yes but it won't happen.

Answer 9

Why not it's natural. Much better treatment then the crap the pharmaceutical companies are shoving down their throats.

Answer 10

More government regulation? No thanks, we have too much of that in Britain as it is.

Answer 11

Just like alcohol.

Answer 12

I tried it but I couldn't get a buzz.

Answer 13

Allowing a very harmful drug that causes mental illness to be used is tantamount to criminal behaviour , And those who allow it can be sued for criminal irresponsibility according to criminal law.

Answer 14

Unfortunately the proper use of such things like alcohol and cannabis require the level of sophistication and maturity that is not common, especailly among Homes Secretaries. As a result, many "users" end up as abusers. It is not the fault of the substances themselves. There are countless responsible drinkers of wine, beers and spirits, just as there are many responsible and mentally sound users of cannabis. But because of the abusers, restrictions must be imposed on their availability.

Answer 15

Yes, it should be restricted to people over the age of 21.

Answer 16

All drugs are dangerous and Skunk is no different, so No is my answer

Answer 17

Yes, I would like to responsibly imbibe 'a little' without being a law breaker.